lie  International  Council 
\  Trade  and  Industrial 
Unions 


By  A.  Losovsky 

(S.  A.  DRIDZO) 


Price  10  cents 

Published  by 

THE  UNION  PUBLISHING  ASSOCIATION 

Neiw  York/  City 


The  International  Council 

of  Trade  and  Industrial 

Unions 


By  A.  Losovsky 

(S.   A.   DRIDZO.) 


Price  10  cents 

Published  by 

THE    UNION   PUBLISHING  ASSOCIATION 

New  York  City. 


- 

J-cL 


The  international  organization  of  the  trade  union  move- 
ment is  proceeding  much  less  quickly  than  the  international 
organization  of  the  Communist  Party.  It  is  already  a  year 
and  a  half  since  the  foundations  of  the  Third  Communist  In- 
ternational were  laid  and  the  centre  for  revolutionary  activity 
for  all  Communists  and  revolutionary  class  elements  in  the 
world  labor  movement  was  created,  whereas  the  trade  unions 
have  remained  right  up  to  the  last  moment  unorganized  in  a 
single  international  organization.  More  than  that,  just  at  the 
moment  when  the  Second  International  has  become  a  corpse 
from  which  the  most  opportunist  parties  are  fleeing,  and  when 
its  most  ardent  supporters  are  compelled  to  admit  that  it  is 
completely  bankrupt,  an  international  federation  of  trade 
unions  is  being  formed  at  the  head  of  which  stand  those  who 
were  the  most  active  participators  in  the  Second  International 
and  who  supported  the  war  policy  of  their  Governments. 

The  trade  union  movement  is  lagging  behind  the  Communist 
movement.  The  trade  unions  are  the  army,  the  closely  massed 
columns  of  the  proletariat,  while  the  Communist  Party  is  the 
advance  guard,  the  pioneer  fighting  detachments  of  the  work- 
ing class.  The'  later  international  organization  of  the  trade 
unions  means  that  the  connection  between  the  advance  guard 
and  the  army  is  broken.  This  is  a  sad,  but  undoubted  fact  in 
all  countries  in  Europe  and  America.  This  break  between  the 
advance  guard  and  the  army  is  exlained  by  the  slow  develop- 
ment of  the  social  revolution,  the  continued  domination  of  the 
dictatorship  of  the  bourgeoisie  and  the  painful  form  which 
the  class  struggle  is  assuming  in  Western  Europe  and  America. 
A  sharp  struggle  is  proceeding  within  the  labor  organizations, 
part  of  which  stand  solidly  for  the  old  capitalist  system  and 
serve  as  a  defence  of  bourgeois  dictatorship. 

This  backwardness  and  reaction  of  many  trade  unions  in 

8 


capitalist  countries  found  their  expression  in  the  formation  of 
an  international  centre  which  is  but  a  rather  bad  edition  of  the 
Second  International,  and  whose  function  is  to  realize  on  an 
international  scale  that  co-operation  of  classes  that  was  so 
"successfully"  realized  during  the  war. 

What  is  the  reason  of  the  backwardness  of  the  internation- 
al proletarian  movement?  What  forms  of  international  organ- 
ization existed  previously  among  the  trade  unions?  What  has 
been  done  and  what  should  have  been  done  to  fight  against  the 
international  of  strikebreakers,  as  the  Amsterdam  Federation 
of  Trade  Unions  is,  and  what  should  be  the  relations  between 
the  newly  established  Third  Communist  International  and  the 
international  organization  of  trade  unions?  These  are  the 
questions  we  have  to  solve. 


Trade  Unions  arose  as  organs  of  the  working  class  to  counter- 
balance the  growing  exploitation.  In  its  early  form  the  trade 
union  was  a  union  of  workers  in  a  certain  craft,  having  for 
its  object  to  assist  its  members  employed  in  a  definite  category 
of  labor.  As  the  capitalist  system  grew  and  developed  so  the 
form  of  organization  of  the  trade  union  changed  also,  and  with 
that  the  scope  and  character  of  its  work  also  changed.  It  is 
necessary  to  observe,  however,  that  the  form  of  organization  of 
the  trade  unions  always  lagged  behind  the  form  of  organization 
of  capitalism  which  during  the  last  nine  years  has  developed 
such  powerful  organizations,  like  trusts  and  syndicates,  the 
competition  among  which,  as  is  known,  led  to  the  world  war. 

While  capitalism  in  the  course  of  its  development  assumed 
new  forms  of  organization  which  facilitated  it  in  exploiting 
labor  and  subjecting  to  itself  the  apparatus  of  the  State,  the 
trade  unions  lagged  behind  like  a  shadow,  in  many  countries 
preserving  the  old  forms  of  organization,  with  all  their  close 
corporative  character,  narrowness  and  limitations.  In  counter- 
acting the  increasing  exploitation,  in  striving  to  raise  the 
standard    of   living,   to   improve   the   conditions    of   labor,   and 


secure  the  principle  of  collective  agreements  the  trade  unions 
always  acted  on  the  basis  of  capitalist  relations,  and  as  the 
unions  grew  and  became  internally  consolidated  the  idea  of  an 
unbreakable  tie  between  the  trade  unions  and  the  existing  order 
of  things  became  stronger.  The  older  the  trade  union  move- 
ment became  and  capitalism  the  more  powerful  the  more 
clearly  and  definitely  did  the  idea  become  of  the  necessity  for 
the  existence  of  capitalism  and  the  co-operation  of  classes  as  a 
condition  for  the  improvement  of  the  standard  of  living  of  the 
workers. 

The  capitalists  of  England,  America  and  Germany,  thanks 
to  their  strength  and  their  dominant  position  in  the  world 
market  were  able  to  make  frequent  concessions  to  the  workers 
and  were  able  to  imbue  them  with  the  firm  conviction  of  the 
stability  of  the  capitalist  system.  The  national  greatness  of 
the  country,  and  particularly  the  economic  importance  of  in- 
dustry is  the  world  economy,  influenced  the  minds  of  the  work- 
ers and  subjected  their  class  interests  to  the  badly  understood 
interests  of  the  moment. 

It  would  be  a  mistake  to  believe  that  the  bourgeoisie  kept  the 
workers  enslaved  only  by  material  necessity;  the  modern  bour- 
geois state  has  created  a  tremendous  arsenal  for  the  enslave- 
ment of  the  working  class.  The  schools,  science,  the  church, 
religion,  literature,  philosophy  created  by  capitalist  society,  all 
represent  weapons  for  the  perversion  of  the  minds  of  the 
workers.  One  must  confess  that  the  spiritual  weapon  is  much 
more  powerful  than  those  methods  which  a  bourgeois  govern- 
ment adopts  to  subject  the  will  of  the  revolting  workers.  This 
spiritual  dependence  of  the  workers  on  bourgeois  ideology  was 
in  greatest  evidence  during  the  war  when  the  trade  unions  be- 
came not  only  a  material  support  of  war  policy,  but  developed 
a  complete  theory  of  class  co-operation,  the  essence  of  which 
was  that  the  workers  are  interested  in  preserving  the  bourgeois 
State  and  the  capitalist  system,  and  should  subject  their  in- 
terests to  the  interests  of  the  whole;  i.  e.,  the  bourgeoisie. 

The  history  of  the  trade  union  movement  during  the  war 
is  the  history  of  the  conversion  of  the  trade  unions  into  sub- 


sidiary  organs  of  the  bourgeois  State,  an  apparatus  of  the 
imperialist  bourgeoisie.  Just  as  during  the  imperialist  war  the 
bourgeoisie  split  up  into  two  hostile  coalitions  each  fighting  for 
world  hegemony,  so  did  the  trade  unions  in  their  respective 
groups  split  into  two  hostile  comps,  not  because  they  had  dif- 
ferent points  of  view  on  principle,  but  because  they  based  all 
their  theory  and  practice  on  the  principle  of  national  defence 
and  on  the  support  of  their  own  capitalism  at  the  expense  of 
the  other. 

The  war  disclosed  the  extraordinary  degree  to  which  the 
trade  unions  were  dependent  upon  bourgeois  ideology.  The 
exclusive  domination  of  national  motive  in  the  trade  union 
movement  is  the  fundamental  reason  for  the  collapse  of  those 
international  connections  that  had  been  made  previous  to  the 
war. 

There  were  forms  of  international  connection  in  the  Trade 
Union  movement  previous  to  the  war.  The  majority  of  trade 
unions  participated  in  the  international  socialist  congresses, 
thus  demonstrating  their  association  with  the  socialist  move- 
ment and  the  international  solidarity  of  trade  unionism  of  the 
various  countries.  This  connection  with  the  socialist  move- 
ment, however,  was  purely  formal,  for  the  trade  unions  on  the 
eve  of  the  war  were  opportunist  and  stood  on  the  right  wing 
of  the  socialist  movement.  The  purely  formal  connection  of 
the  trade  union  movement  with  social  democracy  was  evident 
from  the  fact  that  although  the  trade  unions  in  Germany  were 
regarded  as  social  democratic  they  nevertheless  conducted  a 
definite  policy  often  in  opposition  to  that  of  the  social 
democrats. 

This  purely  formal  connection  between  the  international 
trade  union  movement  and  the  International  Bureau  certainly 
could  not  satisfy  the  demands  for  unity  among  the  trade  unions 
of  the  various  countries  and  so  at  the  beginning  of  the  20th 
century  we  saw  the  rise  of  the  international  secretariat  whose 
function  it  was  to  inform  the  workers  of  various  countries  on 
the  labor     movement     in     other     countries.     The  international 


secretariat  at  the  head  of  which  was  Legien  was  not  an  inter- 
national organization  in  the  full  sense  of  the  word.  Organiz- 
ation presupposes  unity  of  action  and  power  to  act,  while  the 
Secretariat  of  Trade  Unions  was  engaged  in  nothing  else  but 
issuing  literature  and  did  not  even  dream  of  any  international 
action.  It  was  a  centre  which  was  not  responsible  to  its  con- 
stituents each  of  whom  maintained  their  independent  existence. 
On  the  eve  of  the  war  the  trade  union  movement  embraced 
nearly  10,000,000  workers  divided  into  loosely  connected  ter- 
ritorial organizations  whose  work  was  confined  chiefly  to  its 
own  national  questions.  Its  internationalism  was  an  abstract 
principle  rather  than  a  guide  in  every-day  policy.  The  work 
of  the  international  secretariat  during  the  many  years  of  its 
existence  prior  to  the  war  better  than  anything  else  shows  its 
bankrupt  character.  For  the  thirteen  years  of  its  existence  the 
secretariat  did  nothing  more  than  publish  several  reports  and 
a  few  pamphlets.  It  was  more  like  a  post  office  or  an  inter- 
national inquiry  bureau  than  the  international  centre  of  the 
working  class  movement. 

The  trade  unions  were  inter-connected  not  only  through 
their  national  centres.  At  the  end  of  the  19th  century  various 
international  unions  arose  whose  defects,  however,  lay  in  their 
being  craft  unions  pursuing  narrow,  limited  aims.  The  inter- 
national unions  existing  on  the  eve  of  the  war, — metal  workers, 
miners,  textile,  workers,  transport  workers,  painters,  cap- 
makers, woodworkers^  builders,  tailors  and  bootmakers,  etc., — 
were  all  constructed  on  the  principle  of  information  bureaux. 
The  national  interests  stood  above  international  interests,  and 
these  international  organizations  were  the  germs  of  inter- 
national organizations  rather  than  active  international  fight- 
ing centres  of  their  respective  category  of  labor.  During  the 
many  years  of  existence  of  some  tens  of  international  unions, 
it  is  impossible  to  recall  a  single  international  campaign,  not 
a  single  example  of  international  action.  It  is  true  that  there 
were  attempts  at  international  boycot,  collection  of  money  for 
workers  on  strike  in  other  countries,  agreements  on  conditions 
of  labor,  agreements  on  the  transference  of  membership  from 
one   country  to  another,  and  a  number   of   other   examples  of 


international  solidarity,  but  one  has  to  confess  that  the  out- 
standing feature  of  the  pre-war  trade  union  movement  was  that 
international  solidarity  was  but  in  its  embryonic  stage.  The 
preponderance  of  national  questions  over  international 
questions,  and  the  subordination  of  class  interests  of  the  move- 
ment is  brilliantly  illustrated  by  the  war. 


The  war  broke  all  the  three  threads  that  connected  the 
trade  union  movement  of  the  various  countries.  Simultaneously 
with  the  collapse  of  the  Second  International  and  its  conversion 
into  a  tool  of  the  Entente,  the  trade  unions  formed  diplomatic 
coalitions, — Allied  and  Central-European — according  to  the 
particular  government  they  existed  under.  The  formal  advant- 
age lay  with  the  Central  European  coalition,  for  the  reason 
that  the  International  Secretariat  was  in  Germany,  and  Legien, 
following  the  example  of  Vandervelde,  strove  to  use  the  name 
of  the  international  secretariat  for  purposes  having  nothing  in 
common  with  international  solidarity.  Just  as  Vandervelde  re- 
fused to  surrender  the  president's  hammer,  and  used  his  title 
of  President  of  the  International  Bureau  for  sanctifying  the 
lofty  war  aims  of  the  Entente  ^  so  did  Legien  set  the  inter- 
national into  motion  in  defence  of  the  "just  and  sacred"  war 
of  his  government. 

The  International  Secretariat,  together  with  the  Inter- 
national Bureau,  ceased  to  exist  with  the  commencement  of  war 
operations.  The  leaders  of  the  trade  union  movement^  Legien, 
Huber,  Jouhaux,  Appleton  and  Gompers,  were  the  civil  generals 
whose  task  it  was  to  carry  out  the  moral  mobilization  of  the 
masses.  In  justice  to  these  gentlemen  one  must  admit  that 
they  carried  out  their  instructions  brilliantly.  The  trade  unions, 
these  mass  organizations  of  the  working  class,  became  the  main 
bulwark  of  the  bourgeois  State,  and  its  support  in  its  struggle, 
not  only  against  the  external  but  also  against  its  internal 
enemies. 

8 


The  activity  of  the  leaders  of  the  trade  union  movement 
in  this  direction  consisted  in  discrediting  the  leaders  of  the 
enemy  countries  by  accusing  them  of  being  the  servants  of 
their  governments,  and  on  the  other  hand  denouncing  every 
anti-government  action  of  their  workers  as  a  "crime."  The 
breakup  of  the  revolutionary  movement,  and  implanting  and 
fostering  chauvinistic  instincts  in  the  masses  brilliantly  carried 
out  by  them.  The  bourgeoisie  could  not  have  dreamed  of  better 
executioners  of  their  desires. 

The  Allied  trade  union  leaders  made  an  attempt  to  set  up 
a  trade  union  international,  for  which  a  conference  of  Allied 
trade  unions  was  called  in  Leeds  in  1916.  The  task  of  this  con- 
ference was  to  draw  up  a  programme  of  social  legislation,  con- 
demn the  trade  union  movement  of  the  Central  Empires,  and  to 
set  up  its  own  international  secretariat  of  trade  unions.  Of 
these  tasks  the  conference  carried  out  only  one — it  made  a  de- 
monstration against  the  criminal  association  of  the  German 
and  Austrian  trade  unions  with  their  governments.  The  irony 
of  the  story  lay  in  the  fact  that  those  who  condemned  the  as- 
sociation of  workers'  organizations  with  their  governments 
were  just  those  who  themselves  led  the  workers  in  their  own 
countries  into  shameful  slavery  of  the  bourgeoisie. 

The  individual  international  trade  union  organizations  by 
no  means  cut  a  prettier  figure.  They  split  up  according  to  the 
coalition  on  whose^  territory  the  centre  of  their  organization  was 
situated.  Thus  the  International  Bureaux  of  Textile  Workers 
and  Miners  being  situated  in  England,  maintained  the  policy 
of  the  Allies;  while  the  International  Bureaux -of  Metal  Work- 
ers and  Builders  having  their  centres  in  Germany  adopted  the 
policy  of  the  Central  Empires.  The  peculiar  feature  of  the 
whole  period  of  the  crises  in  the  international  trade  union 
movement  is  the  almost  complete  disappearance  of  the  old 
groupings  and  tendencies.  Former  revolutionary  syndicalists 
pure  and  simple  trade  unionists,  "new-patented"  trade  union- 
ists, supporters  and  opponents  of  socialism  all,  with  few  ex- 
ceptions, became  patriots  of  their  fatherland  and  politically  re- 
sembled each  other  like  peas  in  a  pod.    Betrayal  of  the  interests 

9 


of  the  workers  brought  uniformity  among  the  most  divergent 
tendencies. 


The  end  of  the  war  compelled  people  to  think  of  the  re- 
establishment  of  international  connections,  and  this  raised  the 
necessity  for  the  bourgeoisie  to  strengthen  that  co-operation  of 
classes  that  was  developed  during  the  war.  The  re-establish- 
ment of  international  relations  proceeded  along  two  lines;  the 
first  by  means  of  the  Labor  Bureau  of  the  League  of  Nations, 
the  second  the  International  Federation  of  Trade  Unions. 

The  fundamental  idea  lying  at  the  basis  of  the  Labor 
Bureau  is  to  convert  the  working  class  into  a  shareholder  in  the 
international  trust  called  the  League  of  Nations.  The  League 
of  Nations,  as  it  is  known,  was  the  flag  around  which  pacifists 
and  socialist  simpletons  of  various  countries  rallied.  According 
to  its  founder,  Mr.  Wilson,  the  League  of  Nations  was  to  have 
been  the  supreme  international  tribunal  which  was  to  establish 
justice  and  truth  in  the  whole  world.  Of  course  it  was  under- 
stood that  the  League  could  only  carry  out  its  lofty  aims  with 
the  victory  of  the  Allies.  For  that  reason  support  of  the  Allies 
was  a  first  condition  for  the  creation  of  the  League  of  Nations. 
This  assistance  was  forthcoming  from  the  trade  unions  of  the 
Allied  countries  and  it  is  natural  that  as  a  reward  they  de- 
manded the  participation  of  labor  in  the  League  of  Nations. 

It  is  true  that  this  demand  was  conceded  to  a  minimum 
degree.  During  the  war  the  European  and  American  Gom- 
perses  pictured  this  participation  differently.  They  wanted  to 
take  part  in  the  Peace  Congress  itself,  and  to  convene  an  inter- 
national trade  union  congress  at  the  place  where  the  Peace 
Congress  was  to  be  held  in  order  to  bring  pressure  on  the 
diplomatists.  A  number  of  other  combinations  were  intended 
in  order  to  secure  the  carrying  of  their  "own  programme" 
through  their  governments.  But  as  soon  as  the  war  ended  the 
Entente  governments  made  their  lackeys  understand  that  their 
mission  was  ended,  and  the  Peace  Congress  could  very  well  do 

10 


without  them.  Besides  this,  they  were  given  to  understand  that 
to  convene  an  international  trade  union  congress  at  the  place 
where  the  Peace  Congress  was  taking  place  would  be  very  in- 
convenient, and  that  it  would  be  much  more  desirable  if  they 
found  a  spot  somewhat  further  away  for  their  little  excursion. 
Allied  diplomacy,  however,  was  opposed  to  the  entry  of  Labor 
in  the  League  of  Nations  only  where  questions  had  to  be  decided, 
but  had  no  objection  to  it  coming  in  where  questions  were  to  be 
discussed.  Thus  the  International  Bureau  of  Labor  was  estab- 
lished,  which  was  to  demonstrate  the  unity  between  Capital  and 
Labor,  discuss  questions  of  labor  legislation,  speak  of  reforms, 
propose  innovations,  but  to  leave  the  decision  to  the  more  com- 
petent and  mere  interested  bourgeois  government.  The  Inter- 
national Bureau  of  Labor  is  remarkable  for  the  fact  that  it  in- 
cludes representatives  of  the  trade  unions  of  the  Central 
Powers,  although  this  inclusion  cost  the  latter  dear.  The 
bureau  is  composed  of  six  representatives  of  "neutral"  govern- 
ments; at  the  head  is  the  well-known  traitor,  Albert  Thomas. 
This  Bureau  of  Labor  is  a  symbol  of  achievement  of  the  social- 
patriots  of  various  countries  as  a  result  of  their  chauvinist  war 
policy.  Four  years  of  flunkeyism  and  treachery,  four  years 
of  co-operation  with  the  bourgeoisie  and  talk  of  new  relations 
on  the  basis  of  defence  of  national  safety  produced  a  powerless, 
insignificant  Bureau  of  Labor  whose  decisions  are  obligatory 
on  no  one,  which  nobody  desires.  The  mountain  of  class  co- 
operation brought  forth  a  mouse. 


Simultaneously  with  the  setting  up  of  the  Bureau  of  Labor 
of  the  League  of  Nations  the  leaders  of  the  bankrupt  trade 
unions  commenced  to  reorganize  the  Trade  Union  International 
which  they  had  destroyed.  Immediately  after  the  conclusion 
of  the  war  an  international  trade  union  conference  was  con- 
vened at  Berne,  at  which  the  representatives  of  the  Allied 
trade  unions,  Jouhaux,  Appleton  and,Gompers  gave  battle  to 
Legien   and  his   supporters.     This   conference   was   nothing   in 

11 


the  world  like  a  labor  gathering,  because  its  main  work  was 
devoted  to  attacking  the  German  chauvinists  for  supporting 
their  government.  It  was  assumed  that  for  the  Germans  to 
support  their  government  was  bad,  while  being  lackeys  of  the 
Entente  governments  was  conducting  "labor"  policy.  This 
miserable  quarrel  ended  in  a  complete  victory  for  the  Allied 
patriots.  Legien  was  removed  from  his  post  and  the  Secretariat 
was  transferred  to  Holland.  The  Entente  trade  unionists 
triumphed  over  the  trade  unionists  of  the  German  Empire. 

The  second  International  Trade  Union  Congress  was  held 
in  Amsterdam,  to  which  the  German  and  Austrian  trade  unions 
were  permitted  with  equal  rights  as  worthy  members  of  the 
congress.  An  international  organization  was  formed  at  Amster- 
dam, as  well  as  a  bureau,  and  the  trade  union  leaders  who  for 
many  years  called  the  workers  to  mutual  extermination  formed 
an  intrnational  union.  For  what  purpose?  On  the  basis  of  what 
programme?  What  have  these  deadly  enemies  united?  What 
has  compelled  Legien,  Appleton,  Huber  and  Gompers  to  unite? 
These  questions  naturally  arise  in  the  minds  of  every  particip- 
ator in  the  present  day  labor  movement. 

In  the  first  place  it  is  necessary  to  point  out  that  their 
striving  to  set  up  an  international  organization  of  trade  unions 
is  a  reflection  of  the  tremendous  demand  of  the  workers  of  all 
countries  for  the  re-establishment  of  class  unity  destroyed  by 
the  war,  and  to  set  up  an  organization  which  could  in  a  period 
of  storm  and  stress  conduct  a  defensive  and  offensive  struggle 
against  the  capitalist  class.  Of  course  the  Amsterdam  Feder- 
ation was  not  created  for  this  purpose,  but  the  old  trade  union 
leaders  very  well  understood  that  if  they  did  not  hasten  to  set 
up  an  international  organization,  one  would  be  set  up  without 
and  in  spite  of  them.  Thus  the  main  reason  for  the  re-establish- 
ment of  the  international  by  the  hands  of  its  assassins  was  the 
fear  of  their  own  future. 

That  our  explanation  is  the  correct  one  is  seen  from  the 
fact  that  the  Amsterdam  Federation  of  Trade  Unions 
was     formed     without     any     programme.       After       such       a 

12 


tremendous  war,  after  such  colossal  sacrifices  made  by 
the  workers  of  all  countries,  it  should  have  been  natural 
for  real  representatives  of  labor  organizations  to  estim- 
ate the  effects  of  the  great  shock,  to  give  some  reply  to  the 
great  questions  which  interest  the  workers  of  all  countries  at 
the  present  moment,  and  to  show  the  way  out  of  the  cul-de-sac 
into  which  the  imperialist  bourgeoisie  have  led  humanity.  But 
the  Amsterdam  Conference  did  nothing  of  the  kind,  it  silently 
avoided  all  the  burning  questions  affecting  the  present-day 
labor  movement,  believing  they  could  screen  themselves  from 
history  by  silence.  The  Amsterdam  congress  only  troubled  to 
create  a  centre,  and  to  place  at  its  head  the  old  friends  of  the 
Entente;  all  other  things  were  removed  to  the  background. 
This  aim  was  achieved;  the  warm  defender  of  British  Im- 
perialism, Appleton;  the  worthy  defender  of  the  French  bour- 
geoisie, Jouhaux,  and  several  other  not  less  representative  per- 
sons of  the  dying  socialpatriotism  came  to  the  head  of  the  In- 
ternational Federation.  They  united  in  order  to  retain  the 
banner  of  the  international  organization  in  their  hands,  and 
to  use  it  for  the  purpose  of  class  co-operation. 

It  was  precisely  with  this  that  the  International  Federation 
began  its  work.  The  very  people  who  restored  the  class 
organizations  destroyed  by  the  war  bound  these  organizations 
with  the  general  staff  of  international  imperialism — 
the  League  of  Nations.  The  International  Federation  of 
Trade  Unions  and  the  Labor  Bureau  of  the  League  of  Nations 
are  connected  by  personal  and  intellectual  ties,  and  on  the  field 
of  class  co-operation  can  be  seen  the  distinguished  figures  of 
Jouhaux,  Appleton,  Gompers  and  other  heroes  of  the  rear. 

What  has  the  International  Federation  of  Trade  Unions 
done  during  the  period  of  its  existence?  Absolutely  nothing. 
One  cannot  consider  the  mere  existence  of  the  International 
Federation  as  activity.  One  can  take  no  account  of  the  vapid 
and  colorless  resolutions  which  the  International  Federation 
passes  from  time  to  time  and  sends  into  space  in  order  to  re- 
mind the  world  of  its  existence.  An  international,  like  a 
national  labor  organization  can  exist  only  when  it  has  a  definite 

13 


militant  aim,  when  it  knows  what  it  wants,  and  when  ranging 
itself  against  the  whole  of  the  bourgeois  world  goes  directly 
for  its  aim.  There  is  nothing  like  this  about  the  International 
Federation.  There  is  no  class  definiteness  about  it.  It  desires, 
by  means  of  manifestos,  appeals,  by  persuading  the  bourgeoisie, 
to  secure  the  improvement  of  the  conditions  of  the  proletariat. 
This  is  the  programme  upon  which  stand  all  bourgeois  reform- 
ists, all  the  advanced  bourgeoisie  and  the  most  backward  leaders 
of  the  most  backward  labor  organizations. 

When  the  International  Federation  does  at  last  express 
itself  on  some  question  its  every  word  express  trifling  opportun- 
ism and  compromise.  In  January,  1920,  the  Amsterdam  Feder- 
ation expressed  itself  in  favor  of  the  socialization  of  industry, 
and  in  its  First  of  May  manifesto  to  the  workers  of  all  count- 
ries it  put  forward  two  demands;  the  socialization  of  the  means 
of  production,  and  the  carrying  out  of  the  Washington  Congress 
resolutions.  But  how  can  the  socialization  of  the  means  of 
production  be  carried  out?  By  persuading  the  bourgeoisie,  or 
by  revolution?  Nothing  is  said  about  this  in  the  remarkable 
First  of  May  manifesto.  Further,  how  are  the  resolutions  of 
the  Washington  Congress  to  be  carried  out?  That  is,  assum- 
ing that  it  is  the  last  word  in  social  legislation.  How  is  this  all 
to  be  done?  Alas!  No  reply  is  forthcoming,  in  spite  of  the 
fact  that  this  is  the  period  of  the  severest  class  struggle  in  the 
world's  history.  At  the  moment  when  the  leaders  of  the 
Amsterdam  Federation  see  how  the  bourgeoisie  of  all  countries 
insist  on  their  privileges,  when  the  experience  of  Soviet  Russia 
and  Hungary  cries  aloud  to  the  heavens  against  the  hope  that 
the  bourgeoisie  will  make  any  voluntary  concessions,  when  the 
bourgeoisie  of  all  countries  represent  a  united  block,  conduct- 
ing a  mortal  struggle  against  all  the  strivings  of  the  working 
class  for  emancipation,  to  speak  of  the  socialization  of  the 
means  of  production  in  May,  1920,  without  indicating  how  this 
is  to  be  done,  to  put  forward  the  demand  for  the  carrying  out 
of  the  resolutions  of  the  Washington  Congress,  that  labor- 
bourgeois  talking  shop,  and  at  the  same  time  call  their  organ- 
ization a  labor  organization,  is  not  only  senseless,  but  conscious 
treachery.  It  is  no  wonder     therefore     that     the     Amsterdam 

14 


Federation,  composed  of  slaves  of  national  governments,  can- 
not speak  in  any  other  language  than  the  language  of  slavery 
and  treachery. 

Under  these  circumstances,  what  does  the  Anmsterdam 
Congress  really  represent?  A  guiding  center  of  class  unions? 
A  revolutionary  staff  in  the  struggle  against  capitalism? 
Nothing  of  the  kind.  It  is  the  centre  of  reactionary  national 
unions  whose  task  is  to  confuse  class  distinctions  on  an  inter- 
national scale,  and  to  create  the  illusion  that  an  international 
labor  organization  exists,  to  spread  the  idea  of  class  co-oper- 
ation, and  class  peace, — in  a  word,  it  is  the  international  centre 
of  labor  reaction,  and  is  the  most  reliable  support  of  international 
imperialism.  It  is  necessary  to  prove  that  such  a  centre  must 
be  destroyed,  and  the  trade  union  centre  of  labor  reaction  must 
be  opposed  by  a  trade  union  of  working  class  revolution. 


Immediately  after  the  February  Revolution,  at  the  first 
attempt  at  forming  an  Ail-Russian  centre,  the  Russian  trade 
unions  stood  on  the  point  of  view  of  the  necessity  of  forming 
an  international  fighting  centre  of  trade  unions.  Already 
at  the  Third  Conference  of  Trade  Unions  held  June  20-28,  1917, 
the  necessity  was  recognized  of  forming  an  international  trade 
union  organization.  The  First  All-Russian  Congress  of  Trade 
Unions  went  further,  and  in  the  general  resolution  on  the  tasks 
of  the  trade  unions  in  the  period  of  proletarian  dictatorship 
the  Congress  resolved  that:  "The  Russian  Trade  Union  move- 
ment cannot  carry  out  its  tasks  without  entering  into  close 
contact  with  the  international  trade  union  movement.  The 
Congress  regards  it  as  its  duty  to  co-operate  to  the  fullest 
extent  of  its  power  in  the  revival  of  the  international  trade 
union  movement  and  to  make  the  calling  of  a  general  inter- 
national trade  union  congress,  as  well  as  international  con- 
gresses of  individual  trade  unions,  an  immediate  question.  As 
a  first  step  in  this  direction  the  Congress  resolves  to  convene 
an  international  trade  union  congress  in  Petrograd  on  the  5th 
of  February." 

15 


This  resolution,  however^  remained  on  paper.  No  confer- 
ence was  called  for  the  reason  that  immediately  after  the 
October  Revolution,  not  only  did  capitalist  Europe  fling  itself 
with  gnashing  teeth  against  Russia  and  against  the  Russian 
proletariat,  but  even  the  European  social-patriots  hurled 
thunder  and  lightning  against  the  "madness  and  criminality" 
of  the  Russian  proletariat.  The  leaders  of  the  European  and 
American  labor  movement  under  no  circumstances  would  per- 
mit the  initiative  of  calling  an  international  congress  to  be 
taken  by  the  Russian  workers,  and  for  that  reason  they  hasten- 
ed to  create  their  own  organization,  which  is  a  mere  substitute 
for  international  class  unity. 

It  was  evident  from  the  first  days  of  the  existence  of  the 
Amsterdam  Federation  that  the  path  of  the  revolutionary  class 
unions  of  Russia  and  the  labor  lieuenants  of  the  League  of 
Nations  lay  in  different  directions.  But  our  negative  attitude 
to  the  Amsterdam  Federation  took  definite  expression  only  in 
connection  with  the  organization  of  and  convening  an  Inter- 
national Conference  of  Trade  Unions  and  employers'  organiz- 
ations at  Washington. 

The  betrayers  of  the  working  class  went  to  the  extreme  in 
their  endeavor  to  consolidate  their  practice  of  class  co-operation 
on  an  international  scale.  The  All-Russian  Central  Council  of 
Trade  Unions  could  not  remain  silent  in  the  face  of  this  cor- 
ruption of  the  trade  union  movement,  and  addressed  a  manifesto 
to  all  trade  unions  in  Europe  and  America,  denouncing  the 
treacherous  policy  of  the  leaders  of  the  international  trade 
union  movement. 

"They  are  going  to  Washington,"  wrote  the  Central  Council 
of  the  All-Russian  Trade  Unions  in  their  manifesto  of  the  8th 
of  October,  "to  work  out  a  programme  of  international  labor 
legislation.  After  twenty  million  workers  have  been  sent  to 
destruction,  these  people  now  worry  about  labor  legislation! 
Is  this  in  order  to  raise  fresh  crops  of  cannon  fodder  to  sacri- 
fice on  the  altar  of  their  imperialist  fatherland?  They  desire 
to  work  out  a  programme,  and  like  faithful  servants  wait  in 

16 


the  ante-chambers  of  their  patrons, — Wilson,  Lloyd  George  and 
other  experts  in  the  art  of  crushing  the  working  class!  These 
eunuchs  think,  that  the  bourgeoisie  whom  they  served,  out  of 
gratitude  for  their  past  services,  in  confusing  the  minds  of  the 
workers,  will  bring  them  liberal  labor  legislation  on  a  plate  and 
say,  'here  are  some  concessions  for  your  good  conduct'.  These 
little  people  with  slavish  minds  forget  that  individual  persons 
may  receive  presents,  but  that  a  whole  class  cannot  take  a 
'tip'  or  be  satisfied  with  a  sop.  Many  of  the  labor  leaders  hang- 
ing on  to  the  skirts  of  Wilson  have  particularly  flexible  spines; 
as  the  working  class  does  not  possess  such  a  spine,  hanging 
around  ministerial  ante-chambers  is  foreign  and  repulsive  to  it. 
This  is  a  request  to  accept  the  proletariat  as  a  poor  relation 
into  the  limited  company  for  the  exploitation  of  small  and 
weak  nations,  which  in  the  language  of  the  international 
marauders  is  called  the  'League  of  Nations'. 

"They  desire  to  secure  international  labor  legislation  by 
means  of  friendly  negotiations  with  those  who  have  spent  all 
their  lives  and  energy  in  securing  international  capitalist  legis- 
lation. They  desire  to  secure  advantages  for  the  workers  not 
by  means  of  their  organized,  independent,  revolutionary  class 
power,  but  by  means  of  behind  the  scenes  negotiations,  cunning- 
combinations  and  diplomatic  intrigue.  Petty  deceivers!  Where 
have  they  seen  the  bourgeoisie  grant  the  most  petty,  most  in- 
significant social  reform  without  the  direct  action  of  the 
masses?  In  what  country  is  there  a  capitalist  class  that  volun- 
tarily makes  concessions  and  surrenders  part  of  its  profits  and 
income  for  the  sake  of  the  beautiful  eyes  of  bankrupt  labor 
leaders?  There  is  no  such  country.  Such  a  State  and  such  a 
class  does  not  exist.  The  capitalist  class  will  guard  their  pri- 
vileges with  all  the  fibre  of  their  beings,  and  no  waiting  on 
ministers'  doorsteps,  no  slavish  humility  on  the  part  of  the 
working  class  will  compel  the  bourgeoisie  to  change  its  nature. 

"Workers,  you  are  being  deceived!  Watch  the  hands  and 
the  actions  of  your  leaders.  Ask  them  what  the  League  of 
Nations  has  given  the  proletariat;  ask  them  who  crucified  the 
Hungarian  Soviet   Republic;   ask   them   who   placed   arms   into 

17 


the  hands  of  the  Roumanian  assassins;  ask  them  whose  orders 
and  with  whose  money  were  thousands  and  thousands  of  Hun- 
garian workers  murdered;  ask  them  who  supports  Kolchak  and 
Denikin,  who  organizes  white  guard  conspiracies  in  Russia, 
who  supplies  money  and  arms  to  the  Russian  monarchists  who 
are  exterminating  the  Jewish  population,  who  pays  all  these 
Russian  pogromchiks,  with  whose  aid  are  the  fields  and  valleys 
of  Russia  drenched  in  the  blood  of  tens  of  thousands  of  work- 
ers and  peasants, — ask  them  all  this,  and  when  they  tell  you 
about  the  League  of  Nations,  about  agreements  with  the  bour- 
geoisie, that  the  consumptive  Second  International  composed 
of  traitors  can  restrain  world  imperialism,  that  the  ruthless 
dictatorship  of  capital  can  be  softened  by  an  international 
armistice,  and  that  all  this  will  be  in  the  interests  of  the  prole- 
tariat and  socialism, — answer  them  in  the  firm,  determined 
voice  of  a  revolted  proletariat;  tell  them  what  the  fighting 
experience  of  the  Russian  trade  union  says,  'Dictatorship  of  the 
bourgeoisie  or  the  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat;  League  of 
Nations  or  the  Third  International — there  can  be  no  middle 
course.' 

"Out  of  the  road  deceivers  and  hypocrites,  the  Social 
Revolution  is  coming." 

From  this  estimation  of  the  activity  of  the  leaders  of  the 
Labor  Bureau  of  the  League  of  Nations,  and  consequently  of 
the  International  Federation,  it  is  perfectly  clear  that  another 
centre  of  the  trade  union  movement  is  essential.  The  All-Rus- 
sian Central  Council  of  Trade  Unions  therefore  took  the  next 
step  and  sent  out  an  invitation  by  radio  to  all  the  trade  unions 
in  the  world  in  which  it  "invited  all  economic  organizations 
standing  for  real  revolutionary  class  struggle  for  the  emancip- 
ation of  labor  from  the  exploitation  of  capital  by  means  of  the 
dictatorship  of  the  proletariat  to  close  their  ranks  against  the 
international  league  of  plunderers,  break  with  the  compromis- 
ing International  and  together  with  the  All-Russian  Central 
Council  of  Trade  Unions  organize  a  real  international  con- 
ference of  revolutionary-socialist  trade  unions  and  labor  syn- 
dicates.   All  economic  labor  organizations  standing  on  the  plat- 

18 


form  of  revolutionary  class  struggle  are  asked  to  reply  to  our 
call  and  to  enter  into  direct  connection  with  us." 

This  appeal  served  as  a  starting  point  of  a  movement  in 
favor  of  creating  a  new  centre  of  trade  unions  uniting  the  re- 
volutionary class  unions  of  all  countries.  In  view  of  the 
circumstances  which  arose,  considerable  time  elapsed  between 
the  declaration  of  the  need  of  creating  such  a  centre  and  its 
realization.  The  mere  desire  of  the  Russian  trade  unions  was 
not  sufficient,  and  it  was  necessary  to  wait  until  the  revolution- 
ary masses  of  all  countries  converted  the  old  trade  union  organ- 
izations from  weapons  of  reaction  into  weapons  of  the  social 
revolution. 


Simultaneously  with  the  struggle  of  the  Russian  trade 
unions  on  the  social  revolutionary  front  the  labor  organizations 
in  Western  Europe  and  America  became  revolutionized.  The 
labor  masses  streaming  into  the  unions  brought  about  a  change 
in  the  old  decrepit  organizations.  The  trade  union  bureaucracy 
who  reigned  unchallenged  in  the  unions  during  the  war,  began 
to  feel  that  their  position  was  becoming  unstable.  In  England 
a  movement  for  direct  action  is  growing  up  in  the  old  unions. 
The  Miners'  Union,  Transport  Workers'  Union  and  the  Rail- 
waymen's  Union  formed  a  triple  alliance  and  put  forward  de- 
mands which  the  bourgeoisie  cannot  concede.  A  series  of  gig- 
antic strikes  has  shaken  England,  and  if  the  government  has 
come  out  of  it  unharmed,  it  is  only  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
leaders  strove  to  substitute  fighting  by  agreements,  and  at  costs 
to  find  compromises.  Within  the  old  trade  unions  in  England 
there  is  growing  up  a  shop  steward  movement  which,  however, 
is  rather  a  number  of  groups  of  revolutionaries  of  like  opinion 
than  the  factory  committees  in  the  Russian  sense  of  the  term. 
The  British  shop  steward  organizations  exist  simultaneously 
within  and  outside  of  the  trade  unions.  They  stand  for  the  re- 
volutionary class  struggle,  the  violent  overthrow  of  the  capital- 
ist system,  put  forward  the  Soviet  system  as  a  substitute  for 
the   parliamentary  system,   and   put  forward   the  demand  for 

19 


labor  control.  Although  the  British  Shop  Steward  Movement 
is  not  yet  sufficiently  formed  and  its  ideas  not  yet  clearly  de- 
fined, it  is  nevertheless  a  revolutionary  class  protest  against 
the  trade  union  bureaucracy  and  its  hope  of  a  peaceful  solution 
of  the  age-long  conflict  between  capital  and  labor.  If  the  as 
yet  weak  shop  steward  committees  were  confronted  by  a  com- 
pletely unanimous  trade  union  movement  then  the  revolutioniz- 
ation  of  the  British  labor  movement  would  be  a  matter  of  the 
distant  future.  But  the  fact  is  that  the  trade  unions  them- 
selves— not  the  leaders  but  the  broad  masses, — are  pressing  to 
the  left  with  the  progress  of  events.  The  shop  steward  com- 
mittees in  their  struggle  rely  on  the  sympathy  of  the  masses; 
and  as  Macdonald  said  in  one  of  his  speeches,  the  left  wing  in 
the  British  Movement  is  very  weak  in  normal  times,  but 
acquires  considerable  weight  and  importance  immediately  a 
serious  social  conflict  arises.  In  order  to  render  a  complete 
picture  of  the  British  trade  union  movement  it  is  necessary  to 
point  out  that  the  Irish  Trade  Union  Congress  resolved  to  af- 
filiate to  the  Third  International  and  that  a  number  of  Irish 
trade  unions  are  leaving  the  British  organizations  owing  to 
their  compromising  tactics.  The  seven  million  workers  organ- 
ized in  trade  unions  in  England  represent  the  following  picture: 
at  the  top  there  is  the  bureaucracy,  nine-tenths  of  whom  are 
hopeless  compromisers;  at  the  bottom  there  are  the  discontented 
worst  paid  sections  of  the  workers  comprising  the  militant  sec- 
tions of  the  shop  steward  movement,  and  in  the  centre  there  are 
the  average  workers  tied  by  training  and  a  mountain  of  pre- 
judice to  their  fatherland  but  gradually,  under  the  influence  of 
the  severe  lessons  of  life,  emancipating  themselves  from  the 
delusion  of  peaceful,  gradual  and  constitutional  solution  of  the 
social  conflict.  At  all  events  there  are  sufficient  elements  of 
the  new  trade  union  movement  in  England  for  the  new  inter- 
national centre  to  rely  on  at  least  a  section  of  the  organized 
British  workers.  This  was  proved  by  the  conference  called  in 
London  on  the  ll-12th  of  March  on  the  initiative  of  the  work- 
ers' committees.  Nearly  200  delegates  were  present  at  this 
conference,  including  representatives  of  eleven  local  branches 
of  the  Railwaymen's  Union,  three  branches     of     the     General 

20 


Laborers'  Union,  six  branches  of  the  Amalgamated  Society  of 
Carpenters  and  Joiners,  four  South  Wales  Miners'  branches, 
two  branches  of  the  Yorkshire  Miners,  two  branches  of  the 
Electrical  Trades'  Union,  branches  of  the  Builders  Workers' 
Industrial  Union  and  a  number  of  branches  of  other  unions 
and  political  parties.  All  the  resolutions  of  this  unofficial  con- 
ference were  saturated  with  the  revolutionary  class  spirit.  The 
resolution  on  the  nationalization  of  the  mines  says,  "the  con- 
tinued existence  of  the  capitalist  system  of  production  is  leading 
to  the  ruination  of  the  mines.  The  conference  calls  upon  the 
workers  to  set  up  an  industrial  apparatus  through  which  they 
can  take  control  of  the  means  of  production  and  distribution 
into  their  own  hands."  The  conference  expressed  itself  in 
favor  of  direct  action  and  a  general  strike  as  a  means  of  secur- 
ing satisfaction  of  the  miners'  demands.  It  also  carried  a  re- 
solution of  greeting  to  Soviet  Russia,  and  congratulated  the 
Red  Army  on  the  brilliant  victories  it  has  achieved  in  its 
struggle  against  the  united  forces  of  the  capitalist  governments, 
and  expressed  its  solidarity  with  the  Russian  Workers'  Soviet 
Republic.  In  a  special  resolution  the  conference  expressed 
regret  at  the  inactivity  hitherto  displayed  by  the  British 
workers  in  connection  with  the  attack  of  world  capitalism  on 
Soviet  Russia.  Besides  this,  the  conference  demanded  the  in- 
dependence of  Ireland,  sent  greetings  to  the  workers  of  Egypt 
and  India,  and  demanded  the  withdrawal  of  British  troops 
from,  and  the  granting  of  independence  to  these  countries.  It 
declared  against  raising  the  productivity  of  labor  under  the 
capitalist  system,  and  in  a  special  resolution  declared  that  the 
existing  parliament  and  organs  of  local  government  suited  the 
requirements  of  the  capitalist  system  and  served  as  a  means 
for  the  legal  enslavement  of  the  workers.  Soviets,  or  Workers' 
Committees  are  recognized  by  the  workers  of  all  countries  to  be 
the  best  weapon  for  the  overthrow  of  the  capitalist  system,  and 
the  best  organ  of  administration  in  a  Communist  Republic. 
Besides  other  resolutions  the  conference  resolved  to  welcome 
the  Third  Communist  International  formed  in  Moscow  and  to 
call  upon  all  organizations  represented  at  the  conference  to  ac- 
cept the  Communist  platform  and  affiliate  to  the  Third  Inter- 

21 


national.  The  conference  urges  upon  all  those  participating  in 
the  conference  to  see  to  it  that  their  organizations  leave  the 
Second  International  and  the  Lebor  Party  and  affiliate  to  the 
Third  International.  These  resolutions  indicate  that  within  the 
British  labor  movement  there  are  small  but  nevertheless  re- 
volutionary groups  of  workers  who  have  completely  broken 
with  the  Second  International. 

The  situation  in  France  is  somewhat  different.  The  pat- 
riotic attitude  taken  up  by  the  Confederation  Generate  du 
Travail  during  the  war  called  forth  protests  from  a  number  of 
syndicates  already  at  the  end  of  1914.  In  December,  1914, 
Pierre  Monatte,  the  editor  of  the  syndicalist  organ,  "La  Vie 
Ouvriere,"  resigned  from  the  C.  G.  T.,  and  published  a  warm 
protest  against  the  war  policy  of  the  former  revolutionary  syn- 
dicalists. A  "Trade  Union  Defence  Committee"  was  formed  in 
Paris,  around  which  grouped  all  the  international  elements  in 
the  trade  union  movement.  This  committee  is  part  of  the 
"Committee  for  the  Reestablishment  of  International  Con- 
nections," which  is  composed  of  two  sections — trade  union  and 
socialist.  At  the  end  of  the  war  the  left  wing  was  considerably 
strengthened,  and  at  the  congress  at  Lyons,  September,  1919, 
the  minority  received  one  third  of  the  votes.  From  September, 
1919,  the  influence  of  the  left  wing  slowly  but  surely  grew, 
and  a  large  number  of  unions,  including  the  Paris  Metal  Work- 
ers, Railwaymen,  various  local  miners'  unions,  builders,  leather 
workers,  textile  workers  and  a  number  of  department  organiz- 
ations expressed  themselves  in  favor  of  affiliation  to  the  Third 
International.  When  the  decision  of  the  All-Russian  Central 
Council  of  Trade  Unions  to  set  up  a  new  centre  for  the  re- 
volutionary class  unions  became  known  in  France,  it  met  with 
great  sympathy  from  the  left  wing  unions,  and  the  weekly 
organ  of  the  revolutionary  minority,  "La  Vie  Ouvriere,"  at  the 
head  of  which  were  Monatte  and  Rosmer,  spoke  categorically 
against  the  Amsterdam  International  and  for  the  new  Trade 
Union  International. 

In  Italy  the  situation  is  different,  first,  because  for  a  long 
time   two   organizations   have   existed,   one   revolutionary   syn- 

22 


dicalist — the  Italian  Syndicalist  Union — and  the  other  the  re- 
formist General  Confederation  of  Labor.  But  the  stand  of  the 
Italian  proletariat,  its  revolutionary  anti-war  position,  com- 
pelled the  moderate  leaders  of  the  C.  G.  T.  to  conduct  an  inter- 
national policy  in  agreement  with  the  Socialist  Party.  At  the 
end  of  1919  the  revolutionary  syndicalist  unions  expressed 
themselves  in  favor  of  affiliation  to  the  Third  International, 
while  the  C.  G.  T.  not  only  avoided  giving  a  definite  reply  to 
the  questions  raised  by  the  revolutionary  epoch,  but  particip- 
ated in  the  Berne  and  Amsterdam  Conferences  and  even  in  the 
Washington  Conference.  This  opportunist  policy  of  the  C.  G. 
T.  roused  considerable  dissatisfaction  among  the  masses  and 
various  unions  began  to  ask  their  centres  why  they  did  not 
affiliate  to  the  Third  International.  The  Executive  Organ  of 
the  Confederation,  in  March,  1920,  made  vague  replies  to  these 
questions  from  which  one  could  gather  that  it  did  not  wish  to 
say  anything  definite  for  or  against  the  Third  International. 
Meanwhile  various  unions  passed  resolutions  wholly  conform- 
ing to  the  platform  of  the  Third  International.  Thus,  for  in- 
stance, the  general  conference  of  the  Italian  Metal  Workers' 
Union,  which  took  place  in  the  beginning  of  1920,  definitely 
expressed  itself  in  favor  of  affiliation  to  the  Third  Inter- 
national. This  was  the  general  temper  that  reigned  in  the 
majority  of  the  Italian  unions  in  the  middle  of  1920. 

In  Spain  also  two  organizations  existed,  one  patriotic 
headed  by  Vicente  Bario,  and  the  other  which  arose  during  the 
war — revolutionary  syndicalist.  The  new  organization  had  its 
base  in  Barcelona,  with  its  industrial  proletariat  and  old 
anarcho-syndicalist  trade  unions.  For  the  last  two  years  the 
National  Confederation  of  Labor  of  Spain,  as  a  result  of  its 
revolutionary  tactics,  has  dominated  almost  the  whole  of  the 
trade  union  movement  of  Spain.  Out  of  the  million  organized 
workers  in  Spain,  800,000  belong  to  the  revolutionary  syndical- 
ist Confederation  of  Labor,  while  only  200,000  belong  to  the 
opportunist  labor  unions  headed  by  Vicente  Bario.  The  pro- 
gramme of  the  General  National  Confederation  of  Labor  of 
Spain  includes  the  violent  overthrow  of  capitalism,  and  revolu- 
tionary class   struggle  against  the  bourgeoisie   and   the  com- 

23 


promisers  who  co-operate  with  it.  At  its  last  congress,  the 
General  National  Confederation  of  Labor  of  Spain  resolved  to 
affiliate  to  the  Third  International.  In  view  of  the  fact  that 
the  congress  was  held  semi-illegally  and  the  government  had 
forbidden  a  discussion  of  the  question  of  the  proletariat  on  the 
threat  of  dispersal,  the  congress  did  not  pass  any  resolution 
on  this  question.  One  thing  is  clear,  however,  and  that  is  that 
three  quarters  of  the  organized  workers  of  Spain  stand  for  the 
revolutionary  class  point  of  view  and  are  prepared  not  in 
words  but  by  action  to  fight  the  capitalist  class. 

In  Germany  the  trade  unions  have  all  the  time  been 
unanimous,  that  is  if  the  weak  Hirsch-Dunker  and  Liberal 
unions  are  not  considered.  The  Free  Social-Democratic  unions 
entered  the  war  with  a  membership  of  two  and  a  half  million, 
of  which  only  a  third  remained  after  the  end  of  1915.  But  at 
the  end  of  the  war  we  see  in  Germany,  as  in  all  countries,  a 
tremendous  growth  in  the  revolutionary  movement.  In  the 
middle  cf  1920  the  membership  of  the  German  trade  unions 
stood  at  nearly  eight  millions. 

The  German  trade  unions  were  the  most  powerful  appa- 
ratus and  the  main  buttress  of  the  military  policy  of  Hinden- 
burg  and  Ludendorff,  and  in  spite  of  the  defeat  of  Germany, 
the  influence  of  the  trade  union  bureaucracy  remained  even 
after  the  war.  The  excellently  organized  and  centralized  trade 
unions  of  Germany  are  to  a  very  high  degree  adapted  to  crush- 
ing the  revolutionary  spirit  of  the  workers.  Here  the  struggle 
is  much  more  difficult  than  in  other  countries.  The  trade 
unions  are  the  buttress  of  the  Scheidemann  regime,  and  during 
the  Kapp  affair,  and  the  government  crises  connected  with  it, 
the  deciding  factor  in  constructing  the  ministry  was  the  trade 
union  leader  Legien.  As  a  result  of  the  reactionary  policy  of 
the  German  unions  there  arose  an  opinion  in  favor  of  the  re- 
volutionary elements,  leaving  the  trade  unions  which,  in  spite 
of  their  revolutionary  exterior,  are  deeply  reactionary  and  play 
into  the  hands  of  the  governing  bureaucracy.  Besides  the 
labor  unions  having  a  membership  of  60  to  70  thousand  there 
are  in  Germany  revolutionary-syndicalist  organizations  with  a 

24 


general  membership  of  nearly  200,000,  and  it  is  possible  to  find 
in  these  organizations  strong  support  for  an  international 
centre  of  revolutionary  class  unionism.  Inside  the  Legien 
unions  there  is  at  the  present  moment  a  solid  minority  which 
is  fighting  against  the  old  policy.  The  Metal  Workers'  Union 
with  a  membership  of  1,800,000,  the  Textile  Workers'  Union 
with  a  membership  of  450,000,  the  Leather  Workers  with 
200,000  members,  and  the  Berlin  Council  of  Trade  Unions  are 
already  in  the  hands  of  the  Independents  which  means  that 
they  will  soon  pass  into  the  hands  of  the  Communists,  for  the 
inconsistent  and  half-hearted  policy  of  the  Independents  com- 
pels the  workers,  not  only  formally  but  actually,  to  break  with 
the  old  compromising  and  half-hearted  policy. 

It  is  sufficient  also  to  recall  the  severe  struggle  which  the 
rank  and  file  members  of  the  trade  unions  in  the  Ruhr  Basin 
conducted  against  the  Scheidemann  and  Noske  regime  to  be 
able  to  say  that  ground  for  a  revolutionary  class  struggle  in 
Germany  is  sufficiently  prepared;  it  is  only  necessary  to  be 
able  to  take  advantage  of  the  revolutionary  energy  of  the 
mass,  and  this  can  be  done  least  of  all  by  forming  separate 
unions  isolated  from  the  masses. 

In  Austria  the  trade  union  movement  is  in  the  hands  of 
the  social-compromisers,  but  during  the  last  year  the  Com- 
munists have  done  tremendous  work.  Communist  fractions 
have  been  formed  in  all  the  unions,  and  a  special  bureau  has 
been  formed  in  connection  with  the  central  committee  of  the 
Austrian  Communist  Party  for  the  purpose  of  co-ordinating 
the  work  of  the  Communist  fractions  in  the  unions. 

In  Hungary,  after  the  victory  of  the  reaction,  the  old 
social-compromisers  came  to  the  head  of  the  unions  and  en- 
deavored to  continue  their  policy  under  the  white  terror,  but 
the  victorious  counter-revolution  does  not  even  allow  the  social- 
patriots  to  develop.  The  ruthless  white  terror  compels  even  the 
most  backward  Hungarian  workmen  to  understand  that  it  is 
necessary  to  choose  between  the  dictatorship  of  the  bourgeoisie 
and  the  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat. 

In   Czecho-Slovakia,  a   decree   of  the  Government  made  it 

25 


compulsory  for  every  worker  to  belong  to  a  union.  With  the 
aid  of  this  decree  the  government  succeeded  in  crushing  many 
revolutionary  unions  by  the  influx  of  backward  elements  into 
the  unions.  The  majority  of  the  official  organizations  stand 
for  the  Amsterdam  Federation  and  the  Second  International.  The 
minority  stand  rather  solidly  for  revolutionary  class  struggle. 

In  Jugo-Slavia  (Serbia,  etc.),  the  General  Federation  of 
Labor  stands  in  close  contact  with  the  Communist  Party  and 
for  the  Third  International. 

The  last  trade  union  congress  in  Esthonia  voted  for  the 
platform  of  the  Third  International  and  in  White  Finland  the 
general  trade  union  centre  and  the  large  unions  also  stand  for 
revolutionary  class  struggle.   • 

The  last  conference  of  the  Norwegian  trade  unions  which 
took  place  in  Christiania  at  the  end  of  July,  1920,  resolved  to 
affiliate  to  the  Third  International.  In  Sweden,  Denmark, 
Holland,  and  in  all  other  European  countries  there  are  im- 
portant minorities  who  stand  for  revolutionary  class  struggle. 

The  position  in  America  is  very  peculiar.  The  powerful 
American  Federation  of  Labor  is  entirely  in  the  hands  of 
Gompers  and  Co.  Side  by  side  with  this  body  there  is  the  re- 
volutionary organization — the  Industrial  Workers  of  the 
World,  whose  influence  lies  chiefly  among  the  unskilled  labor- 
ers. The  I.  W.  W.  is  undoubtedly  a  revolutionary  organization, 
but  its  theory  and  tactics  suffer  from  many  serious  defects,  as 
a  result  of  which  it  embraces  only  some  hundreds  of  thousands 
(*)  of  the  millions  of  the  American  proletariat.  In  spite  of  the 
fact  that  the  whole  apparatus  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  is  directed 
towards  crushing  the  revolutionary  ferment  in  the  American 
unions,  the  unions  are  nevertheless  becoming  revolutionized. 
Within  the  large  trade  unions  a  serious  movement  is  growing 
up  against  the  theories,  and  particularly  against  the  practice 
of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  and  its  leaders.  Besides  this  there  are  many 
large  unions  in  America  who  do  not  belong  to  the  A.  F.  of  L., 
and  which  are  becoming  revolutionary  under  the  influence  of 
the  sharpening  social  struggle. 

In  Canada  the  strike  movement  of  1919  affected  the  whole 

26 


of  the  trade  union  movement.  It  particularly  affected  the  re- 
volutionary unions,  and  in  a  number  of  towns  during  the  strikes 
in  April-May,  1919,  the  Strike  Committee  became  the  only 
authority  in  the  town.  American  trade  unionism,  which  in- 
tellectually and  organizationally  had  the  Canadian  movement 
in  its  hands,  became  discredited  among  a  large  section  of  the 
workers.  The  Canadian  movement  became  not  only  formally 
independent  of  the  American  unions,  but  also  intellectually  in- 
dependent of  the  bourgeoisie. 

The  trade  unions  in  Australia  and  other  British  colonies 
are  divided,  in  some  cases  intellectually  and  in  other  organiz- 
ationally, into  two  camps — for  and  against  revolutionary  class 
struggle,  for  and  against  co-operation  of  classes.  This  division 
has  reached  even  such  countries  as  Java,  India  and  Japan, 
where  the  movement  has  only  just  arisen,  where  the  trade 
unions  arose  as  a  result  of  the  severe  revolutionary  strikes, 
and  where  as  a  result  of  the  very  conditions  of  the  struggle 
the  movement  cannot  take  any  other  stand  than  that  of  re- 
volutionary class  struggle.  Thus  the  world  trade  union  move- 
ment, which  in  the  middle  of  1920  united  more  than  30  million 
workers,  varies  very  greatly.  Many  trade  unions  are  nothing 
more  than  organized  representatives  of  the  bourgeoisie  within  the 
labor  movement, — and  the  International  Federation  of  Trade 
Unions  and  the  Labor  Bureau  of  the  League  of  Nations  are  the 
general  staff  directing  the  organized  operations  of  the  bour- 
geoisie against  the  trade  union  movement.  It  naturally  follows, 
therefore  that  the  task  of  the  day  is  not  only  theoretically  to 
condemn  the  policy  of  compromise  and  class  co-operation,  and 
advocate  affiliation  to  the  Third  International,  but  to  give  it 
form  by  setting  up  a  revolutionary  class  centre  of  the  trade 
union  movement.  This  was  done  in  Moscow  in  July  of  the 
present  year. 


The  arrival  in  Russia  of  British,   Italian  and  other  Trade 
union  delegates  for  the  purpose  of  studying  conditions  in  that 

27 


country,  served  as  a  starting  point  for  the  negotiations  for  the 
creation  of  a  new  trade  union  centre.  The  preliminary  nego- 
tiations with  the  representatives  of  the  left  wing  of  the  British 
trade  unions  showed  that  there  was  common  ground  for  reach- 
ing an  agreement  between  the  class  unions  of  various  countries. 
On  the  initiative  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Third  In- 
ternational a  meeting  took  place  on  the  10th  of  June,  1920, 
between  the  representatives  of  the  British  trade  unions  (Robert 
Williams  and  Alfred  Pursell),  the  Italian  Federation  of  Labor 
i~L.  D'Aragona  and  Joseph  Bianchi),  the  Italian  Federation  of 
Metal  Workers  (E.  Colombino),  the  Italian  Federation  of  Agri- 
cultural Workers  (Dugoni)>  representatives  of  the  All-Russian 
Central  Committee  of  Trade  Unions  (A.  Lozovsky,  M.  Tomsky, 
G.  Tsiperovitch,  and  V.  Schmidt),  and  the  President  of  the 
Executive  Council  of  the  Third  International  (G.  Zinovieff). 
The  first  meeting  was  held  for  the  purpose  of  discovering 
to  what  extent  there  was  unity  of  opinion  on  the  fundamental 
questions  of  the  international  trade  union  movement.  It  be- 
came clear  that  the  views  of  the  Russian  trade  unions  were 
only  partly  acceptable  to  the  representatives  of  both  the  British 
and  Italian  movement.  The  differences  arose  on  the  following 
points:  (1)  the  relations  between  the  future  trade  union  centre 
and  the  Third  International;  (2)  the  Dictatorship  of  the  Pro- 
letariat; (3)  and  the  relations  to  the  Amsterdam  Federation  of 
Trade  Unions.  Both  the  Italian  and  the  British  representatives 
assumed  that  the  relations  of  the  new  trade  union  centre  should 
be  decided  at  an  early  international  congress  of  revolutionary 
class  unions.  It  appeared  also  that  the  representatives  of  three 
countries  present  variously  understood  the  theoretical  and 
practical  meaning  of  the  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat.  In 
connection  with  the  Amsterdam  Federation,  Dugoni  declared 
that  "many  members  of  the  Italian  trade  unions  did  not  belong 
to  the  Third  International  but  to  the  Amsterdam  International, 
nevertheless  they  conducted  a  severe  class  struggle  against  the 
bourgeoisie,  and  therefore  to  identify  them  with  the  yellow 
international  would  rouse  a  protest  on  the  part  of  the  Italian 
masses."  Nobody  of  course  desired  to  identify  the  Italian 
workers    with    the    yellow    international.      The    fact    that    the 

28 


Russian  delegation  described  the  Amsterdam  Federation  as 
"yellow"  was  undoubtedly  a  correct  definition  of  its  political 
character.  If  there  was  any  opposition  to  so  describing  the 
Amsterdam  International,  it  certainly  did  not  came  from  the 
rank  and  file  of  the  British  and  Italian  trade  unions,  but  from 
the  central  organs  who  still  belong  to  that  body. 

In  spite  of  a  number  of  disagreements  on  principle,  it  was 
nevertheless  found  possible  to  agree  on  the  following:  (1)  the 
necessity  of  forming  a  new  centre  of  revolutionary  class  unions ; 
(2)  to  call  an  international  congress  of  left  trade  unions;  (3) 
to  elect  a  committee  to  make  preparations  for  the  congress; 
(4)  to  work  in  close  contact  with  the  Third  International. 
These  four  points  served  as  a  basis  for  further  negotiations 
after  the  departure  of  the  British  representatives. 

In  the  beginning  of  July  of  the  present  year  there  were 
present  in  Moscow  representatives  of  the  Italian,  Spanish, 
Bulgarian,  Jugo-Slav  and  French  trade  unions,  British  shop 
steward  committees,  the  Syndicalists  and  Labor  Unions  (Ar- 
beiter  Unionen)  of  Germany,  the  I.  W.  W.  of  America  and 
Australia.  Official  and  unofficial  negotiations  and  meetings 
with  these  brought  to  light  a  number  of  radical  differences  on 
points  of  principle,  for  the  discussions  at  these  meetings  center- 
ed around  (1)  Dictatorship  of  the  Proletariat,  (2)  Politics  and 
Economics,  (3)  the  necessity  for  a  political  party  for  the  pro- 
letariat, (4)  relation  to  the  Third  International,  (5)  Proletarian 
government  and  the  Soviet  system,  (7)  splitting  off  from  or 
conquering  the  mass  unions.  These  questions,  as  we  see, 
touched  the  very  foundations  of  the  trade  union  movement, 
and  it  is  essential  to  clear  them  up  before  anything  in  the 
nature  of  an  international  organization  can  be  formed. 


Dictatorship  of  the  Proletariat  was  contested  from  two 
points  of  view.  On  one  hand  it  was  shown  that  in  Western 
Europe  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat,  i.  e.,  the  violent  suppres- 
sion of  the  exploiters,  and  the  subjection  of  the  peasants  and 

29 


petty  bourgeoisie  o  the  proletariat,  as  was  done  in  Russia,  is 
impossible,  and  that  it  was  still  less  possible  too  to  subject  the 
less  class-conscious  workers  to  the  advance  guard  of  the  work- 
ing class.  Several  representatives  of  the  Italian  Federation  of 
Labor  argued  that  the  question  of  the  dictatorship  of  the  pro- 
letariat was  not  at  all  clear  and  for  that  reason  this  should  not 
be  made  the  central  point  of  agreement  between  the  revolution- 
ary class  union.  This  point  of  view  was  shared  by  Dugoni  and 
partly  by  D'Aragoni.  "Trade  unions,"  said  comrades  in  dis- 
cussion, "are  non-party  organizations  including  supporters  and 
opponents  of  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat,  and  it  would  there- 
fore be  better  not  to  speak  of  it  in  the  preliminary  declaration, 
but  to  leave  the  question  to  the  international  congress."  After 
a  long  discussion  the  Italian  delegates  proposed  to  formulate 
this  point  in  the  following  way:  "to  propagate  the  method  of 
proletarian  dictatorship  as  a  final  and  transitional  means  of 
defence  and  consolidation  of  the  conquests  of  the  proletarian 
state  against  the  bourgeois  reaction."  That  it  is  necessary  to 
propagate  the  idea  of  proletarian  dictatorship  is  beyond  the 
slightest  doubt,  nevertheless  one  of  the  most  fundamental 
questions  of  modern  labor  policy  must  not  be  placed  in  this 
academic  fashion.  The  German  syndicalists,  the  British  and 
American  representatives  of  the  I.  W.  W.  and  the  Shop 
Stewards  approached  the  question  from  quite  a  different  point 
of  view.  They  questioned  the  necessity  of  any  form  of  dictator- 
ship. They  regarded  the  dictatorship  not  as  the  dictatorship 
of  the  proletariat,  but  as  dictatorship  over  the  proletariat  and 
categorically  protested  against  establishing  this  principle.  One 
must  state  that  these  representatives  were  not  unanimous  on 
the  question.  While  the  German  syndicalists  and  representa- 
tives of  the  Labor  Unions  would  not  hear  of  dictatorship  of 
any  form,  the  representatives  of  the  I.  W.  W.  and  the  Shop 
Stewards  admitted  the  possibility  of  the  dictatorship  of  ''pro- 
letarian organizations,"  although  they  thought  that  the  re- 
volution will  be  brought  about  by  the  industrial  unions  which 
will  not  have  to  set  up  any  dictatorship.  In  vain  did  we  point 
out  that  whatever  kind  of  organization  will  overthrow  the  bour- 
geoisie, it  will,  nevertheless,  for  the  protection  of  the  working 

30 


class,  become  a  power  to  crush,  not  only  the  resistance  of  the 
exploiters,  but  also  the  resistance  of  the  workers  who  follow 
it, — the  industrialists  and  syndicalists  were  firm  on  one  thing, 
— dictatorship  of  the  proletariat  may  be  necessary  for  Russia, 
but  it  is  absolutely  unnecessary  for  Western  Europe  and 
America  where  the  proletariat  will  be  able  to  make  its  revolu- 
tion and  manage  to  protect  its  gains  without  it. 

After  four  joint  meetings  with  the  industrialists  and  syn- 
dicalists the  latter  proposed  a  resolution  worked  out  jointly  by 
them  which  was  to  be  the  basis  of  the  new  international  trade 
union  organization.  The  main  points  of  the  resolution  are  as 
follows:  "(1)  Recognition  of  revolutionary  class  struggle  as  a 
fundamental  principle.  (2)  The  violent  overthrow  of  the  State 
and  capitalism  by  adopting  the  dictatorship  of  proletarian 
organization  as  a  temporary  and  transitional  measure  for  the 
attainment  of  Communism." 

The  insufficiency  of  these  two  points  as  'a  platform  was 
quite  evident.  One  must  not  limit  oneself  to  the  recognition  of 
revolutionary  class  struggle;  one  must  demand  the  practical 
application  of  it.  On  the  other  hand  it  was  impossible  to  agree 
to  the  formula  of  the  overthrow  of  the  State  unless  there  was 
a  definite  indication  of  what  kind  of  State  was  meant,  the 
bourgeois  State  or  State  in  general.  AH  this  indefiniteness 
was  quite  natural,  for  the  industrialists  and  syndicalists  not 
only  could  not  agree  with  us,  but  they  could  not  agree  among 
themselves,  so  much  were  they  divided  for  and  against  the 
dictatorship  of  the  proletariat,  and  they  were,  therefore  com- 
pelled to  accept  an  indefinite  resolution  in  order  to  satisfy 
everybody.  .  As  a  matter  of  fact  they  achieved  the  very  op- 
posite, for  their  resolution  satisfied  nobody.  In  substitution  of 
this  indefinite  formula  the  representatives  of  the  All-Russian 
Central  Council  of  Trade  Unions  proposed  the  following  point 
on  the  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat:  "The  dictatorship  of  the 
bourgeoisie  must  be  opposed  by  the  dictatorship  of  the  prole- 
tariat as  a  transitional,  but  resolute  measure  as  the  only  means 
by  which  it  is  possible  to  crush  the  resistance  of  the  exploiters, 
and  secure  and  consolidate  the  gains  of  the  proletarian  govern- 
ment." 

31 


This  formula  was  adopted  by  all  except  the  syndicalists, 
and  the  representatives  of  the  I.  W.  W.  and  the  Shop  Stewards. 


The  confusion  in  connection  with  the  dictatorship  of  the 
proletariat  arose  from  the  fact  that  the   syndicalists   and   in- 
dustrialists approached  the  question  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
old   anarchists   on  politics  and  economics.     In  the  first  place, 
they  oppose  dictatorship  because  they  regarded  it  as  politics, 
and  they  regarded  it  as  politics  because  the  dictatorship  was 
carried  out  by  a  political  party.     This     old     dispute     between 
Marxism  and  anarchism  arose  now  because  the  representatives 
of  some  labor  'organizations   (syndicalists,  industrialists,  I.  W. 
W.)  opposed  politics  in  the  old  anarchist  spirit.    "All  politics," 
said  the  representatives  of  the  German   syndicalists,  "distract 
the  worker  from  the  direct  struggle  and  should,  therefore,  be 
abandoned ..."     "A  political  party  by  its  very  composition  is 
foreign  to  the  workers  and  strives  to  dominate  them,  and  this 
represents  a  great  danger  for   the  social  revolution.     The   in- 
dustrial  unions   will   make  the   revolution   not   only   without   a 
political  party,  but  in  opposition  to   it."     The  representatives 
of  the  I.  W.  W.  judging  parties  by  their  American  experience, 
stood  for  approximately  the  same  point  of  view.     For  them  also 
the  weapon  of  the  social  revolution  was  the  industrial  unions, 
and  it  did  not  even  occur  to  them  that  any  other  organization 
could   play   even   an  auxiliary  role.      The   Shop    Stewards'   re- 
presentatives took  a  middle  course,  and  stood  for  the  necessity 
of  co-ordinating  all  theparties  that  belonged  to  the   Third  In- 
ternational, but  they  did  not  carry  this  to  a  logical  conclusion. 
In  reply  to  our  argument  that  it  is  impossible  to  separate 
politics   from    economics,   that   there   was    not    a    single    great 
economic   conflict   that  was  not   at  the   same  time  a  political 
conflict,   that  to    divide  the   social    struggle    into   an   econom'c 
and  political  straggle  meant  the  weakening  of  the  proletariat, 
they  said  that  the  experience  of  Western  European  and  Amer- 
ican parliamentarism  proves  that  politics  corrupt  the  workers 
and  that  the  political  struggle  distracts,  them  from  their  class 

32 


aims.  All  the  while  they  confused  politics  with  parliamentar- 
ism. Comrade  Rosmer,  the  representative  of  the  French  syn  - 
dicalists,  adopted  a  healthy  point  of  view.  He  pointed  out 
that,  in  the  first  place,  if  the  proletariat  made  a  revolution  it 
must  be  able  to  defend  it;  it  must  beat  off  all  attacks  of  its 
enemies  and  finally  crush  them.  For  this  purpose  it  is  nec- 
essary to  have  a  dictatorship.  Secondly  he  pointed  out  that 
the  Communist  Party  and  the  revolutionary  unions  must  marcii 
side  by  side,  and  tha  tonly  on  such  conditions  could  the  victories 
of  the  working  class  be  secured. 

It  was  difficult  to  unite  these  conflicting  tendencies,-  • 
from  the  denial  of  the  necessity  of  a  political  party — to  the 
recognition  of  the  necessity  of  the  inseverable  connection  be- 
tween the  party  and  the  unions,  on  a  single  platform.  It  was 
still  more  difficult  to  reconcile  the  point  of  view  of  the  Russian 
trade  unionists  on  the  supremacy  of  the  party  over  the  union? 
with  the  various  views  explained  above.  The  discussion  showel 
one  thing,  and  that  was  that  those  elements  of  the  labor  move 
ment  which  denied  the  political  struggle,  which  denied  the  ne- 
cessity of  a  political  party  of  the  proletariat,  and  the  closest 
bond  between  the  Communist  Party  and  the  trade  unions  could 
not  enter  the  new  international  trade  union  centre,  because  the 
whole  idea  of  international  organization  of  the  revolutionary 
unions  lay  in  gathering  all  the  economic  and  political  organ- 
izations of  the  working  class  into  one  body — the  Third  Inter- 
national— for  defensive  and  offensive  operations  against  the 
capitalist  class.  This  point  of  view  was  shared  not  only  by 
the  representatives  of  Russia,  Italy,  Bulgaria,  Jugo-Slavia,  and 
Georgia,  but  also  Rosmer,  the  representatives  of  the  French 
syndicalists,  and  even  Pestana,  the  representative  of  the  Na- 
tional Federation  of  Labor  of  Spain,  an  organization  which 
stands  entirely  for  the  anarcho-syndicalist  point  of  view.  Pes- 
tana said  that  he  could  not  imagine  such  a  relation  between 
the  party  and  the  unions  as  existed  in  Russia,  in  Spain,  for 
the  reason  that  in  Spain  the  unions  are  a  great  force,  while 
the  Communist  Party  is  only  in  its  embryonic  stage.  He 
opposed  the  subordination  of  the  unions  to  the  party,  but  was 
in  favor  of  the  closest  contact  between  the  party  and  the  unions 

33 


on  a  national  and  international  scale.  Neither  the  representa- 
tives of  the  British  Shop  Stewards  or  the  American  I.  W.  W. 
objected  to  co-operating  with  the  Communist  Party,  but  the 
German  syndicalists  and  the  representatives  of  the  industrial 
Labor  Unions  were  categorically  opposed  to  any  co-operation. 


The  proletarian  State  was  subjected  -to  severe  criticism  by 
the  anarchist  wing  at  these  meetings.  It  was  not  for  nothing 
that  they  introduced  the  point  of  the  overthrow  of  the  State 
in  general.  For  these  syndicalists  and  for  the  several  repre- 
sentatives of  the  I.  W.  W.  the  State  was  a  sort  of  Beast  of 
the  Apocalypse.  The  bourgeois  State  had  so  impressed  them 
with  its  power  that  they  imagined  that  a  State  by  its  very 
construction  must  always  be  a  tool  of  oppression  of  the  work- 
ing class.  They  presumed  that  after  the  revolution,  and  after 
the  break  up  of  the  State  and  its  institutions  the  proletariat 
will  not  erect  anything  in  its  place,  because  any  newly  con- 
structed State,  independently  of  the  will  of  its  creators  will, 
by  its  very  nature,  begin  to  show  exploiting  tendencies.  Here 
of  course  we  have  to  deal  with  a  purely  anarchistic  understand- 
ing of  the  meaning  of  State  as  a  non-class  growth;  and  to  the 
extent  that  the  syndicalists  and  the  industrialists  approached 
the  question  of  the  State  from  this  point  of  view;  they  were 
quite  unable  to  understand  the  nature  of  the  proletarian  State. 
For  them  a  proletarian  State  could  not  exist.  Such  a  view 
of  the  State  is  a  logical  outcome  of  their  view  of  the  Dictator- 
ship of  the  Proletariat,  for  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat  and 
the  proletarian  State  are  one.  The  writer  of  these  lines,  in 
the  discussion  of  this  anti-state  principle,  resorted  to  the  fol- 
lowing illustration  in  order  to  prove  the  inconsistency  of  the 
argument.  We  will  presume  that  the  I.  W.  W.  after  a  strike 
and  revolt  seized  the  factories  and  works  in  America,  drove 
the  bourgeoisie  and  the  troops  that  were  on  their  side  out 
of  the  large  centres,  began  to  organize  production  and  socially 
distribute  products.        But  although  the  bourgeoisie  has  been 

34 


conquered,  it  has  not  yet  been  dispersed,  the  fight  still  con- 
tinues. How  will  the  I.  W.  W.  arrange  matters,  so  that  on  the 
one  hand  it  will  be  able  to  proceed  to  the  organization  of  pro- 
duction and  the  social  distribution  of  products,  and  at  the  same 
time  defend  itself  against  the  armed  forces  of  the  interna- 
tional bourgeoisie?  Would  they  make  use  of  the  existing 
commodities  and  material  resources  in  order  to  supply  the  peo- 
ple with  their  necessary  requirements?  Will  they  set  up  some 
kind  of  apparatus  for  conducting  the  struggle  against  the 
exploiters?  If  they  will  do  this, — and  the  victorious  working 
class  cannot  refrain  from  doing  this  or  else  they  will  lose  all 
their  gain  in  a  few  days, — then  they  are  by  that  setting  up  a 
centralized  government,  no  matter  whether  the  revolution  had 
been  carried  out  by  a  party  or  by  the  I.  W.  W.  itself.  Thus 
the  question  of  a  proletarian  State  is  not  an  abstract  theory, 
but  a  question  of  practical  politics,  for  the  social  revolution 
is  not  "beyond  the  hills"  in  Western  Europe  and  America, 
and  every  labor  organization  must  find  a  reply  to  the  question, 
"How  can  the  bourgeois  be  conquered? 

The  opponents  of  the  State  in  any  form  found  it  difficult 
to  reply  a  concrete  example  of  this  sort,  for  however  much 
one  cares  to  argue  against  the  State,  no  sensible  worker  will 
deny  the  necessity  of  setting  up  an  apparatus  with  which  to 
consolidate  the  victory  of  the  working  class  and  for  the  final 
rout  of  the  bourgeois  counter-revolution.  For  this  reason  on 
this  question  as  on  others  there  was  no  unity  in  the  camp 
of  the  syndicalists  and  industrialists, — the  Russian  revolution 
has  taught  many  to  be  very  critical  of  old  theories  and  to 
abandon  all  that  contradicts  the  acts  of  life. 

Of  course  in  all  the  discussion  we  laid  emphasis  on  the 
point  that  the  proletarian  State  is  not  an  end  but  a  means  to 
an  end,  that  we  are  anti-State  but  not  in  the  sense  that  we 
deny  the  necessity  of  State  in  any  form  but  in  the  sense  that 
we  set  up  a  State  for  the  purpose  of  smashing  the  resistance 
of  the  bourgeoisie,  and  after  it  has  served  its  purpose,  to 
place  it  in  the  museum  of  history.  The  proletarian  State  is 
a  temporary  and  transitional  phenomena,  not  in  the  customary, 
but  in  the  historical  sense  of  the  word;  i.  e.,  it  is  a  weapon  of 

35 


struggle  of  the  working  class  for  a  whole  historical  period. 
With  the  disappearance  of  classes  the  State  in  all  its  forms 
will  also  disappear,  and  society  will  only  preserve  the  organs 
of  production,  distribution  and  statistics  necessary  for  serving 
the  requirements  of  the  masses. 

These  comrades  also  raised  doubts  concerning  the  Soviet 
system.  They  asserted  that  the  Soviet  system  is  not  applica- 
ble to  Western  Europe,  and  that  the  industrial  unions  and  the 
shop  stewards'  committees  will  perform  the  function  of  the 
Soviets  there.  Of  course  it  is  difficult  to  discuss  what  form 
the  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat  will  take  in  Western  Europe. 
In  all  probability  some  other  kind  of  organization  will  arise 
in  England,  Germany  and  America  which  will  serve  as  a  bat- 
tering ram  to  break  up  the  old  world  and  also  as  the  apparatus 
for  carrying  out  the  functions  of  organization  and  construc- 
tion. The  form  in  which  the  apparatus  is  clothed  is  not  im- 
portant. The  demand  for  the  Soviet  system  means  that  the 
old  bourgeois-democratic  parliamentary  form  of  State  is  break- 
ing down  and  that  new  form  is  arising  in  its  place  which 
embraces  the  wide  masses  and  the  proletarian  organizations. 
The  future  will  show  whether  the  British  shop  stewards'  com- 
mittees or  the  industrial  unions  will  play  this  part  or  not; 
what  is  important  is  that  the  social  revolution  cannot  be  real- 
ized unless  organizations  similar  to  the  Soviets  are  set  up.  We 
need  not  argue  what  these  organizations  shall  be  called. 


One  would  have  thought  that  the  question  of  the  relation 
to  the  Third  International  would  not  raise  much  discussion, 
nevertheless  this  was  very  heatedly  debated  at  all  the  meet- 
ings. In  the  first  place  the  Italian  and  German  syndicalists 
doubted  the  desirability  of  affiliating  to  the  Third  International, 
but  attention  was  centered  on  the  relations  between  the  newly 
formed  international  organ  to  the  Communist  International. 
The  representatives  of  the  All-Russian  Central  Council  of  Trade 
Unions  were  of  the  opinion  that  the  trade  unions  should  organ- 
ize sections  within  the  Third  International.     From  this  it  fol- 

36 


lows  that  the  Third  Communist  International  should  be  the 
general  staff  of  all  the  militant  revolutionary  class  organiza- 
tions of  the  proletariat. 

All  the  delegates  except  the  Bulgarians  opposed  the  Rus- 
sian delegation.  The  Italians,  French  and  English,  approach- 
ing the  question  from  various  points  of  view  were  inclined  to 
the  opinion  that  an  independent  international  organization 
should  be  set  up  which,  while  being  connected  by  ideas  and 
organization  with  the  Third  International,  nevertheless  should 
lead  an  independent  existence.  The  representative  of  the  Ger- 
man syndicalists  and  of  the  Australian  I.  W.  W.  were  against 
all  connection  with  the  Third  International  and  argued  that  the 
trade  unions  under  no  circumstances  will  associate  with  a  po- 
litical organization.  It  is  characteristic  that  the  same  point 
of  view  was  held  by  the  representatives  of  the  German  Labor 
Unions,  Otto  Ruhle,  who  represented  the  German  Communist 
Labor  Party,  the  distinguishing  feature  of  which  is  that  it 
denies  the  necessity  and  usefulness  of  politically  organizing  the 
working  class.  On  this  question,  as  on  other  questions,  the 
syndicalists  and  the  I.  W.  W.  differed.  On  this  occasion  it 
was  due  to  the  I.  W.  W.  supporting  affiliation  to  the  Third 
International  and  formal  affiliation  would  compel  them  at  all 
events  to  express  themselves  in  favor  of  co-operating  with  the 
Third  International.  The  objection  to  forming  sections  within 
the  Third  International  was  based  on  purely  formal  grounds, 
— the  delegates  stating  that  they  had  no  authority  from  their 
organizations  to  do  this,  but  it  was  clear,  however,  that  this 
formality  was  merely  an  excuse  for  the  Italians,  French,  Amer- 
icans and  the  British  to  turn  down  the  proposal  of  the  Russian 
delegation.  Finally  it  was  decided  to  agree  to  inter-representa- 
tion of  both  bodies  and  to  submit  the  question  for  final  dis- 
cussion to  the  International  Congress  of  revolutionary  class 
unions  which  should  take  place  at  an  early  date. 


The  question  that  raised  most  discussion  was  that  of  the 
tactics   of  the   Communist  revolutionary   elements   within    the 

37 


trade  union  movement  in  connection  with  the  old  mass  unions. 
The  question  was:  Should  the  old  unions  be  split  or  captured? 
Considerable  differences  were  revealed  among  the  delegates  on 
this  point.  Recognizing  their  weakness  in  comparison  with  the 
German  "free"  unions  which  embrace  nearly  8,000,000  mem- 
bers, the  German  syndicalists  and  representatives  of  the  Ger- 
man Labor  Unions  declared  that  the  present  day  "free"  unions 
of  Germany  were  hopeless,  that  it  was  necessary  to  destroy 
them  and  only  by  destroying  them  it  will  be  possible 
to  conquer  the  bourgeoisie.  The  representatives  of  the 
I.  W.  W.  held  the  same  viewpoint.  In  their  opinion 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor  is  an  invincible  for- 
tress. The  only  thing  to  do  was  to  abandon  it  and  set  up  a 
separate  organization  outside  of  it.  They  further  asserted  that 
the  reactionary  characer  of  the  American  Federaion  of  Labor 
is  bound  up  with  its  very  construction,  and  to  think  of  fighting 
the  treacherous  policy  of  Gompers  inside  the  unions  was  an 
Utopia.  All  this  evidence  of  the  invincibility  of  the  trade 
union  bureaucracy  created  a  curious  impression.  On  one  hand 
these  comrades  were  preparing  to  bring  about  a  social  revolu- 
tion in  their  country;  i.  e.,  they  calculate  on  overthrowing  the 
powerful  American  capitalist  class  with  its  excellently  organ- 
ized State  apparatus  and  in  its  place  to  set  up  the  power  of 
the  working  class, — and  on  the  other  hand  they  speak  of  Gom- 
pers with  such  holy  horror  as  if  to  drive  Gompers  and  the 
other  traitors  out  of  the  trade  unions  was  a  much  more  difficult 
task  than  overthrowing  the  mighy  capitalist  class  of  America. 
Both  the  German  and  the  American  comrades  were  clearly 
illogical,  for  it  is  ridiculous  to  think  that  it  is  possible  to  bring 
abou  a  social  revolution  in  Western  Europe  without  or  in  spite 
of  the  trade  unions.  To  leave  the  unions  and  to  set  up  small 
independent  unions  is  an  evidence  of  weakness,  it  is  a  policy 
of  despair,  and,  more  than  that,  it  shows  lack  of  faith  in  the 
working  class.  One  must  choose  between  two  positions,  either 
the  social  revolution  is  inevitable,  that  the  working  class  is 
pressing  toward  the  overthrow  of  capitalism,  and  the  trade 
unions,  however  reactionary  they  may  be  at  present,  will  change 
their  character  under  the  influence  of  the  revolutionary  mass, 

38 


— or  the  social  revolution  is  a  matter  of  the  distant  future, — 
in  that  case  no  unions,  however  revolutionary  their  programmes 
may  be,  will  be  of  much  use.  Those  comrades  who  despair  of 
capturing  the  working  masses  floundered  in  this  contradiction 
all  time.  It  is  obvious  that  a  conference  of  representatives  of 
trade  unions  of  various  countries  could  not  adopt  a  point  of 
despair  and  it  was  resolved  to  "condemn  the  tactics  of  advanced 
revolutionary  elements  leaving  the  existing  unions.  On  the 
contrary,  these  must  take  all  measures  to  drive  the  opportunists 
out  of  the  unions  carry  on  a  methodical  propaganda  for  Com- 
munism within  the  unions,  and  to  form  Communist  and  revolu- 
tionary groups  in  all  the  organizations  for  conducting  propa- 
ganda in  favor  of  our  programme." 

This  point  was  severely  attacked  not  only  by  those  who  sup- 
ported a  split  from  the  unions  on  principle,  but  also  by  the 
British  Shop  Stewards,  who  like  their  American  and  German 
comrades,  desired  to  have  their  hands  free  on  the  question 
leaving  and  splitting  the  trade  unions.  But  the  conference 
could  not  sanction  such  a  desertion  of  the  mass  organizations 
of  the  workers.  That  the  conference  took  up  the  correct  point 
of  view  is  proved  by  the  Second  Congress  of  the  Third  Inter- 
national which  sharply  opposed  the  tactics  of  leaving  the  unions. 
The  motto  put  forward  by  the  Communist  International,  and 
which  is  our  motto  also,  is:  "Not  the  destruction,  but  the 
conquest  of  the  trade  unions." 

It  may  have  been  possible  on  other  questions  to  compromise 
in  order  to  secure  agreement,  but  on  this  cardinal  question  of 
international  labor  policy  no  compromise  was  possible.  The 
matter  should  not  be  regarded  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
interest  of  this  or  that  group,  or  from  the  peculiar  conditions 
of  this  or  that  country,  but  from  the  general  interests  of  the 
revolution.  If  this  method  of  regarding  the  question  is  adopted, 
then  it  will  be  clear  that  neither  the  Communist  International 
nor  the  trade  union  organizations  affiliated  to  it  could  put  for- 
ward any  other  motto,  because  for  the  revolutionary  elements 
to  leave  the  unions  would  mean  playing  Legiens'  and  Gompers' 
hand;  it  would  relieve  the  unions  under  their  influence  of  the 


restless  elements.  The  revolutionary  class  unions  must  not 
and  will  not  render  Legien,  Appleton,  Jouhaux,  and  other 
traitors  such  a  service. 


*     * 


These  conferences  ended  in  the  acceptance  of  a  declaration 
which  should  serve  as  a  basis  for  gathering  all  the  revolution- 
ary class  unions  into  one  organization.  This  declaration  was 
discussed  for  a  whole  month,  and  is  the  result  of  a  compromise 
between  various  tendencies.  In  view  of  the  extreme  importance 
of  the  declaration  we  quote  it  here  in  full: 

"We,  the  undersigned  representatives  of  Russian,  Italian, 
Spanish,  French,  Bulgarian,  Jugo-Slav  and  Georgian  trade 
and  industrial  unions  called  together  by  the  Executive  Com- 
mittee of  the  Third  International,  consider: 

"That  the  position  of  the  working  class  in  all  countries 
created  by  the  imperialist  war  from  day  to  day  demands  more 
distinct  and  energetic  class  struggle  for  the  final  cessation  of 
exploitation  and  the  establishment  of  the  Communist  system; 

"That  this  struggle  must  be  conducted  on  an  international 
scale  with  the  closest  organization  of  all  workers — not  in  craft 
groups  but  in  industrial  organizations; 

"That  so-called  social  reforms,  like  the  reduction  of  the 
working  day,  increases  of  wages,  regulating  conditions  of  labor, 
etc.,  under  certain  circumstances  ease  the  struggle  of  the 
classes,  but  are  in  themselves  unable  to  solve  the  social  problem; 

"That  in  the  majority  of  the  belligerent  countries  the 
greater  part  of  the  trade  unions — neutral,  or  non-political 
unions — during  the  deplorable  years  of  the  war  became  the 
servants  of  imperialist  capitalism  and  retarded  the  final  emanci- 
pation of  labor; 

"That  the  working  class  must  gather  all  the  trade  union 
organizations  into  one  powerful  revolutionary  class  association 
which,  working  side  by  side  with  the  political  organization  of 
the  international  Communist  proletariat,  and  in  close  contact 
with  it,  could  develop  all  its  strength  for  the  final  victory  of 

40 


the  social  revolution  and  the  establishment  of  world-wide  Soviet 
Hepublic ; 

"That  the  possessing  classes  are  sparing  no  efforts  to 
crush  the  movement  for  the  emancipation  of  the  exploited; 

"That  the  dictatorship  of  the  bourgeoisie  must  be  opposed 
by  the  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat,  as  a  transitional  and 
resolute  method,  which  alone  is  able  to  crush  the  resistance  of 
the  exploiters  and  consolidate  the  gains  of  the  proletarian  gov- 
ernment ; 

"That  the  Amsterdam  International  Federation  of  Trade 
Unions  is  unable  with  its  programme  and  tactics  to  lead  to  the 
triumph  of  the  above  mentioned  principles,  and  cannot  secure 
the  victory  for  the  proletarian  masses  of  all  countries; 

"Therefore  resolves: 

"(1)  To  condemn  the  tactic  of  the  advanced  revolution- 
ary elements  leaving  the  existing  unions.  These  on  the  con- 
trary should  adopt  all  measures  to  drive  out  of  the  unions  the 
opportunists  who  have  coo-perated  with  the  bourgeoisie  by  sup- 
porting the  imperialist  war  and  who  continue  to  serve  the 
interests  of  capitalist  imperialism  by  participating  in  the  ac- 
tivities of  the  pseudo-League  of  Nations. 

"(2)  To  conduct  Communist  propaganda  within  the  trade 
unions  in  all  countries,  and  organize  Communist  and  revolu- 
tionary groups  in  every  organization  for  the  purpose  of  propa- 
ganda for  the  acceptance  of  our  programme. 

"(3)  To  organize  a  militant  international  committee  for 
the  reorganization  of  the  trade  union  movement.  This  com- 
mittee will  function  as  the  International  Council  of  Trade 
Unions  and  will  act  in  agreement  with  the  Executive  Committee 
of  the  Third  International  on  conditions  that  will  be  laid  down 
by  congresses.  All  trade  and  industrial  unions  affiliated  to 
the  Council  should  be  represented  on  it.  One  representative 
of  the  International  Council  of  Trade  Unions  should  be  in- 
cluded in  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Third  International 
and  a  representative  of  the  latter  should  be  included  in  the 
International  Council  of  Trade  Unions. 

41 


"Signed: 

A.  LOSOVSKY, 

All-Russian  Central  Council  Trade  Unions. 
L.  d'ARRAGONA, 

General  Confederation  of  Labor,  Italy. 
A.  PESTANA, 

National  Confederation  of  Labor,  Spain. 
N.  SHABLIN, 

General  Syndicalist  Labor  Unions,  Bulgaria. 
A.   ROSMER, 

Revolutionary  Syndicalist  Minority,  C.  G.  T.,  France. 
N.  MIKADO, 

Communist  Minority  Trade   Unions,  Georgia. 
N.  MILKITCH, 

General  Confederation  of  Labor,  Jugo-Slavia  (Serbia, 
etc.). 

A  close  reading  of  this  document  will  show  that  it  surrers 
from  a  number  of  defects.  In  the  first  place  the  declaration 
does  not  sum  up  the  period  through  which  we  are  living  at  the 
present  moment;  it  does  not  describe  the  activity  of  the  Am- 
sterdam Federation  of  Labor,  but  only  says  that  it  is  incapable 
of  doing  anything  with  its  programme  and  tactics.  The  de- 
claration does  not  sufficiently  brand  these  trade  union  leaders 
who  stand  at  the  head  of  this  organization.  It  limits  itself 
to  general  declarations  on  the  necessity  of  driving  the  oppor- 
tunists from  the  governing  positions  in  the  unions.  But  the 
main  defect  in  the  declaration  lies  in  that  it  does  not  sufficiently 
define  the  relations  to  the  Third  Communist  International,  be- 
cause inter-presentation  on  the  respective  executives  presup- 
poses the  existence  of  an  organization  parallel  with  the  Third 
Communist  International  which  unites  the  revolutionary  class 
unions.  Such  a  division  of  organization  may  lead  to  the  aliena- 
tion of  the  trade  unions  from  the  centre  of  the  world  Commun- 
ist movement,  particularly  if  such  a  state  of  affairs  lasted  for 

42 


any  length  of  time.  The  interests  of  the  revolutionary  class 
movements  demand  that  there  should  be  more  clearness  on 
this  point  as  on  all  the  other  questions. 

What  is  the  reason  of  the  vagueness  and  incompleteness 
of  the  declaration?  It  is  the  fact  that  several  of  the  organ- 
izations represented, — the  General  Confederation  of  Labor  of 
Italy,  the  unions  which  Robert  Williams  and  Albert  Purcell 
represent, — still  belong  to  the  Amsterdam  Federation  of  Trade 
Unions,  and  that  the  leaders  of  even  the  revolutionary  class 
unions  of  Western  Europe  lag  behind  the  revoluionary  masses. 


Thus,  on  the  15th  of  July,  1920,  an  International  Council 
of  Trade  Unions  was  formed  in  Moscow.  What  does  this  newly 
created  organization  rest  on?  The  numerical  strength  of  the 
International  Council  of  Trade  Unions  is  as  follows: 

Members 

All-Russian  Central  Council  of  Trade  Unions 5,200,000 

General  Confederation  of  Labor,  Italy 2,000,000 

National  Confederation  of  Labor,  Spain 800,000 

Revolutionary  Syndicalist  Minority,  France 700,000 

General  Confederation  of  Labor,  Jugo-Slavia *  150,000 

General  Labor  Syndical  Unions,  Bulgaria 90,000 

Communist    Minority,    Georgia 15,000 


Total 8,965,000 

We  thus  see  that  the  newly  created  centre  of  the  interna- 
tional trade  union  movement  embraces  more  than  8,000,000 
organized  workers.  But  this  figure  does  not  by  a  long  way 
exhaust  the  real  strength  of  the  new  organization.  Although 
the  I.  W.  W.,  and  the  representatives  of  the  British  Shop 
Stewards  refused  to  sign  the  declaration  quoted  above,  owing 
to  their  attitude  on  the  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat  and  split- 
ting the  old  unions,  nevertheless  these  organizations  have  no- 

43 


where  else  to  go;   they  cannot  but  go  with  the  International 
Council  of  Trade  Unions. 

They  cannot  join  the  Amsterdam  Federation  of  Trade 
Unions,  they  are  not  in  a  position  to  form  their  own  interna- 
tional organization,  and  as  they  are  revolutionaries  and  prole- 
tarians they  will  have  to  go  together  with  the  Communist  In- 
ternational and  consequently  with  the  International  Council  of 
Trade  Unions.  As  for  the  left  unions  in  England,  Robert  Will- 
iams and  Alfred  Purcell  gave  the  Russian  and  Italian  delegates 
power  to  sign  the  declaration  on  their  behalf.  But  on  its  final 
revision  their  names  were  not  included.  The  writer  of  these 
lines  and  the  general  secretary  of  the  General  Confederation 
of  Labor  of  Italy  sent  them  the  following  radio: 

"In  view  of  the  considerable  revision  of  the  declaration 
which  we  drew  up  together  we  have  decided  not  to  include 
you  among  the  signatories,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  you  had 
given  permissio  nto  do  so.  Inform  us  by  radio  whether  your 
organizations  have  agreed  to  affiliate  to  the  International 
Council  of  Trade  and  Industrial  Unions?  Bring  the  question 
of  the  new  international  centre  of  the  trade  union  movement 
before  all  the  unions  standing  for  energetic  revolutionary  class 
struggle,  direct  action  and  the  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat." 

Although  no  reply  to  this  radio  has  up  to  the  time  of 
writing  been  received  (August  10th),  nevertheless  one  can  say 
without  fear  of  error  that  out  of  the  7,000,000  organized  work- 
ers in  Great  Britain  there  must  be  many  tens  of  thousands 
standing  for  our  point  of  view. 

If  we  add  the  whole  of  the  trade  union  movement  of  Es- 
thonia,  Norway,  Finland  and  the  revolutionary  unions  of  Ger- 
many, Austria,  and  Holland,  a  number  of  revolutionary  unions 
in  Canada  and  America,  and  the  Irish  trade  unions,  we  get 
more  than  10,000,000  organized  workers  upon  whom  the  Inter- 
national Council  of  Trade  Unions  can  rely  in  its  revolutionary 
struggle.  This  is  not  much  if  one  bears  in  mind  that  the  pro- 
gramme of  the  International  Council  of  Trade  Unions  is  the 

44 


programme  of  the  Third  International;  i.  e.,  social  revolution 
and  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat,  but  it  is  much  if  one  re- 
members that  the  new  international  centre  of  the  trade  union 
movement  has  just  commenced  its  existence.  In  contrast  to 
the  Amsterdam  Federation  the  new  centre  embraces  a  unanim- 
ous revolutionary  mass  while  the  former  has  many  millions  of 
workers  out  of  the  18,000,000  who  belong  to  it,  who  are  con- 
ducting a  revolutionary  struggle  against  compromise  and  oppor- 
tunism, and  for  the  social  revolution.  The  International  Coun- 
cil of  Trade  Unions  only  exists  a  few  weeks,  and  yet  a  tremen- 
dous army  of  workers  has  already  rallied  to  its  banner.  This 
is  a  sign  of  the  times.  AH  the  organizations  which  stand  for 
the  co-operation  of  classes  wither  and  collapse  every  day.  This 
was  the  fate  of  the  Second  International,  that  will  be  the  fate 
of  its  double — the  Amsterdam  Federation  of  Trade  Unions. 
On  the  other  hand  these  organizations  which  stand  for  revolu- 
tionary struggle  and  civil  war  grow  and  develop  to  the  extent 
that  the  class  conflict  becomes  more  intense.  As  the  develop- 
of  the  revolution  finally  destroyed  the  Second  International, 
from  which  even  the  most  moderate  parties  are  fleeing  as  if 
from  a  plague  spot  so  is  the  Amsterdam  Federation  doomed  to 
destruction.  The  revolutionary  epoch  does  not  tolerate  half- 
heartedness  and  indecision.  Every  labor  organization  must 
choose  with  whom  and  agai7ist  whom  it  is  going  to  take  a 
stand, — with  the  Amsterdam  Federation,  the  last  bulwark  of 
the  bourgeoisie  and  social  reaction, — or  with  the  International 
Council  of  Trade  Unions,  the  complementary  and  inseparable 
part  of  the  Third  Communist  International,  the  world  centre  of 
the  Social  Revolution.  It  will  be  difficult  to  make  the  choice. 
We  are  convinced  that  the  day  is  not  far  off  when  the  workers, 
on  a  national  and  international  scale,  will  take  their  deceived 
and  deceiving  leaders  to  the  front  door  of  their  organizations 
and  firmly  and  resolutely  say  to  them,  "We've  had  enough 
of  you;  clear  out!"  They  will  do  this  because  the  cleaning 
out  of  the  ranks  of  labor  is  a  preliminary  condition  of  victory. 

Petirograd-Murmansk,  8-12  August,   1920. 

A.  LOSOVSKY. 
45 


APPENDIX  I. 

MINUTES  OF   THE   FIRST  CONFERENCE  OF  REVOLU- 
TIONARY TRADE  UNIONS  OF  GREAT  BRITAIN, 
ITALY  AND  RUSSIA. 

The  minutes  of  the  Conference  of  the  Representatives  of 
the  Revolutionary  Trades  Unions  of  Great  Britain,  Italy  and 
Russia,  held  in  Moscow  in  the  Union  House,  the  premises  of 
the  Moscow  Council  of  the  Trade  Unions,  the  16th  of  June, 
1920,  on  the  question  of  organization  of  the  Red  International 
of  Trade  Unions. 

Chairman:    G.  Zinovieff. 

Secretary:   C.  Ziperevitch. 

The  delegates  present:  G.  Zinovieff  (chairman  of  the 
Executive  Committee  of  the  Third  International) ;  Great  Bri- 
tain: Robert  Williams,  Transport  Workers'  Federation;  A.  A- 
Purcell,  tihe  Parliamentary  Trade  Union  Congress;  Italy:  d'Ara- 
gona  and  Guiseppe  Bianchi,  delegated  by  the  Italian  National 
Confederation  of  Labor;  Enrico  Dugoni,  Italian  National  Fede- 
ration of  Landworkers;  Emilio  Colombino,  Italan  Metal  Work- 
ers; Russia:  A.  Losovsky,  M.  Tomsky,  G.  Ziparovitch,  V. 
Schmidt,  members  of  the  Presidium  of  the  All-Russian  Central 
Council  of  the  Trade  Unions;  G.  Melnichansky,  delegated  by 
the  Moscow  Council  of  Trade  Unions. 

Comrade  Zinovieff  explained  the  point  of  view  of  the 
Executive  Committe  of  Communist  International  on  the  question 
of  the  international  unification  of  the  trade  unions.  He  pointed 
out  the  serious  danger  threatening  the  revolutionary  movement 
of  the  world  proletariat,  owing  to  the  destructive  work  of  the 

46 


Amsterdam  International,  which  is  still  gathering  around  itself 
millions  of  workers.  The  yellow  Amsterdam  International  of 
Trade  Unions  is  not  by  any  means  merely  a  technical  organ 
of  the  International  movement.  Bound  strongly  through  the 
socialist-opportunists:  Jouhaux,  Legien,  Appleton,  and  others 
with  the  League  of  Nations,  first  of  all  through  the  Washing- 
ton Labor  Bureau,  the  Amsterdam  International  is  a  political 
weapon  in  the  hands  of  the  Entente,  the  strongest  it  ever  pos- 
sessed. The  task  confronting  the  proletariat  is  to  tear  this 
weapon  from  its  hands.  But  how  shall  this  be  done?  By  the 
creation  of  a  Communist  centre  in  the  heart  of  the  Amsterdam 
International,  in  order  to  blow  it  up  from  within^  by  the  forma- 
tion of  an  independent  International  of  Red  Unions  as  a  contrast 
to  the  yellow  Amsterdam  International;  or  by  the  organization 
of  a  trade  union  section  of  the  Third  Communist  International, 
which,  under  the  direction  of  the  latter,  should  commence  a 
campaign  against  the  Amsterdam  International  under  the  ban- 
ner of  Communism. 

Comrade  Zinovieff  declared  that  the  Executive  Committee 
of  the  Communist  International,  according  to  the  decision  of  the 
First  Congress,  has  chosen  the  latter  point  of  view,  as  the  only 
sound  one  for  the  present  time,  and  named  several  countries, 
some  of  which  have  already  agreed  to  this  point  of  view,  and 
some  are  ready  to  agree  to  it  in  consequence  of  outside  circum- 
stances. Thus,  for  instance,  all  the  Trade  Unions  of  Soviet 
Russia  have  already  joined  the  Third  Communist  International 
in  accordance  with  the  resolution  of  the  Third  Conference  of 
the  Russian   Trade   Unions. 

The  Scandinavian  countries,  Bulgaria,  some  of  the  most 
powerful  German  unions  and  their  association  (viz.,  the  Metal 
Workers'  Association,  the  Railway  Employees,  the  Central 
Council  of  the  Berlin  Trade  Union),  as  well  as  the  Triple  Al- 
liance of  the  railwciymen^  miners  and  transport  workers  in 
Great  Britain,  and  the  I.  W.  W.  in  the  United  States  of  North 
America,  etc.,  are  inclined  toward  his  view.  That  is  why,  is 
the  opinion  of  Comrade  Zinovieff,  the  organization  of  the  Trade 
Union  Section  of  the  Third  International  would  be  highly  im- 

47 


portant  and  practically  easy  to  realize,  and  at  the  present  time, 
in  order  that  the  second  Congress  may  deal  with  an  actually 
accomplished  fact,  the  organization  of  this  section  as  an  anti- 
thesis to  the  yellow  International  would  not  only  make  clear 
the  attitude  which  the  Trade  Unions  and  syndicates  adopt  to- 
wards the  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat,  but  also  give  a  strong 
impetus  to  the  growing  separation  of  the  working  masses  of  the 
whole  world  from  the  yellow  International,  which  is  spending 
its  energy  in  support  of  the  counter-revolutionary  Entente. 

Comrade  Williams,  agreeing  with  the  essential  thesis  de- 
veloped by  Comrade  Zinovieff  and  urging  the  growth  of  sym- 
pathy in  the  ranks  of  the  British  trade  unions  towards  the 
Third  International,  pointed  out  that  the  present  conference 
cannot  definitely  resolve  the  problem  in  question,  as  not  all  the 
delegates  present  are  authorized  to  do  so,  and  on  the  other  hand, 
it  is  necessary  to  carry  out  a  considerable  amount  of  prelimi- 
nary work  in  order  that  the  first  step  towards  uniting  the 
revolutionary  trade  unions  and  syndicates  should  be  firmer  and 
more  efficient.  Accordingly,  Comrade  Williams  proposed  first, 
to  confrim  the  opinion  expressed  by  Comrade  Zinovieff  on  the 
position  of  International  Trade  Union  movement  and  to  accept 
his  criticisms  of  the  Amstredam  Congress  and  the  yellow  Inter- 
national of  Legien,  Jouhaux  and  others;  and,  second,  immedi- 
ately to  appoint  a  provisional  committee  composed  of  the  dele- 
gates present  at  the  conference  in  order  to  convoke  as  soon  as 
possible  an  International  Conference  of  the  Trade  Unions  stand- 
ing on  the  platform  of  the  Third  International.  This  confer- 
ence should  be  authorized  to  decide  concretely  as  to  what  form 
the  Red  International  of  Trade  Unions  should  take. 

Comrade  Zinovieff  read  the  first  clause  of  the  resolution, 
which  was  translated  into  English  and  Italian,  and  after  that 
proposed  to  consider  it. 

Comrade  Dugoni  declared  that  he  must  decline  to  sign  this 
resolution  firstly  because  he  is  not  authorized  by  his  organiza- 
tion to  do  so,  and,  secondly,  because  he  does  not  agree  with 
some  of  the  expressions  used  in  the  clause  of  said  resolutions. 
Many  members  of  the  Italian  Syndicates  do  not  belong  to  the 

48 


Third  International  and  are  members  of  the  Amsterdam  Inter- 
national, yet  they  are  conducting  a  fierce  class  struggle  against 
tfie  bourgeoisie.  Their  identification  with  the  yellow  Interna- 
tional may  call  forth  a  protest  on  the  part  of  the  Italian  work- 
ers. 

Comrade  Losovsky  pointed  out  that  the  authority  to  sign 
the  resolution  does  not  play  any  essential  part  in  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  provisional  committee  for  the  preparation  of  aw 
International  Conference  which  shall  decide  the  question  of  its 
relation  to  the  Third  International  and  the  Amsterdam  Confer- 
ence. 

Comrade  Zinovieff  had  no  objections  to  make  against  the 
softening  of  some  sharp  expressions  and  proposed  to  read  the 
whole  resolution.  Comrade  d'Aragoni  agreed  to  the  proposal 
of  Comrade  Williams  and  asked  at  the  same  time  to  clear  up 
more  precisely  the  connection  between  the  Red  Trade  Unio*i», 
that  will  join  the  section  of  the  Communist  Internationa^  and 
their  national  centres. 

If,  for  instance,  some  union  joins  the  Third  International, 
does  that  mean  that  the  said  union  should  automatically  leave 
its  national  federation  because  the  latter  continues  to  be  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Amsterdam  International? 

Comrade  Tomsky  asked  whether  the  English  and  Italian 
delegation  are  ready  to  appoint  at  once  a  provisional  committee 
composed  of  the  representatives  of  the  Russian,  British  and 
Italian  delegations  with  the  object  of  conducting  propaganda 
for  organization  work,  and  also  of  preparing  for  an  interna- 
tional conference,  proposed  by  Comrade  Williams  and  standing 
in  the  closest  connection  to  the  Communist  International? 

All  the  delegates  present  gave  an  affirmative  reply  to  the 
question  put  by  Comrade  Tomsky,  and  proposal  made  by  Com- 
rade   Williams   was    accepted. 

Comrade  Losovsky  gave  his  view  on  the  question  raised 
by  Comrade  d'Aragoni.  He  pointed  out  that  the  admittance 
of  a  union  to  the  Third  International  through  the  section  by  no 
means  compels  it  to  leave  its  own  national  federation,  but  it  is 
obliged   while   remaining   a   member    of   the   said   federation   to 

49     - 


prepare  the  latter  to  pass  to  the  International  of  the  Red  Trade 
Unions  by  working  constantly  in  this  direction.  He  is  bound 
as  well  to  aim  at  splitting  all  the  working  masses  off  from  the 
Amsterdam  International  Federation  of  Trade  Unions,  using 
for  this  object  all  the  practical  questions,  the  answers  to  which 
are  determined  by  the  character  of  their  relation  to  the  dictator- 
ship of  the  proletariat. 

Comrade  Zinovieff  on  the  question  raised  by  Comrade  d'Ara- 
goni  pointed  out  that  an  analogical  position  has  been  observed 
at  Zimme  ,-wald.  The  delegates  taking  part  at  that  congress 
were  not  obliged  at  the  time  to  previously  resign  their  mem- 
bership of  the  Second  International,  although  Russia  had  even 
at  that  time  taken  this  decisive  measure;  the  justice  of  which 
has  been  later  on  fully  confirmed  by  life  itself. 

Comrade  Losovsky  thought  it  necessary  to  make  all  possible 
efforts  to  shorten  the  stage  of  preliminary  organization  work. 
There  is  no  time  for  waiting.  The  trade  union  movement  has 
lagged  considerably  behind  the  political  movement.  The  isola- 
tion of  the  trade  union  organizations  from  the  decisive  actions 
of  the  political  vanguards  of  the  revolutionary  working  class 
is  keenly  felt  in  many  countries.  It  is  necessary,  therefore,  that 
all  unions  holding  to  a  determined  point  of  view  on  the  revolu- 
tionary class  struggle  by  their  adherence  to  the  Third  Interna- 
tional, should  clearly  and  decidedly  demonstrate  to  the  working 
masses  the  gulf  existing  between  them  and  the  yellow  Interna- 
tional Federation  of  Trade  Unions.  That  does  not  mean,  of 
course,  that  these  unions  will  not  take  part  in  their  own  inter- 
national congresses.  On  the  contrary,  such  a  participation  is 
obligatory  for  them.  For  that  reason  Comrade  Losovsky  pro- 
posed to  charge  the  Provisional  Committee,  which  should 
be  appointed  immediately  to  begin  working  for 
the  organization  of  an  international  conference  of  Trade  Union 
Federation,  Syndicates  and  Trade  Unions.  At  the  same  time 
he  pointed  out  that,  according  to  information  published  by  the 
International  Department  of  the  Central  Council  of  Russian 
Trade  Unions  not  only  Russian  but  also  the  trade  unions  in 
Spain,  Argentina,  Brazil,  and  most  of  the  Polish  trade  unions 

50 


have  already  joined  the  Third  International.  The  same  desire 
has  been  expressed  by  the  representative  of  the  Bulgarian  trade 
unions  "tesniak"  Communist,  the  Comrade  Nedelkoff  now  stay- 
ing in  Moscow. 

Comrade  d'Aragoni  said  that,  having  heard  the  above  ex- 
planations, he  withdraws  his  previous  declaration. 

Comrade  Zinovieff  pointed  out  that  the  conference  will  not 
elaborate  a  detailed  plan  of  the  new  organization  of  interna- 
tional revolutionary  trade  unions,  but  shall  establish  immediately 
the  following  principles,  whether  it  is  necessary  or  not  to  begin 
at  once  with  the  organization  of  the  Red  International  Trade 
Unions  in  one  or  another  form  on  the  basis  of  the  resolutions 
passed  by  the  Third  International.  As  far  as  the  Russian  trade 
unions  are  concerned  this  question  has  been  decided  in  the 
affirmative.  Now  it  is  the  turn  of  the  trade  unions  of  the 
other  countries  and  first  of  all,  of  course,  of  the  Italian  and 
English  trade  unions.  If  the  delegates  at  present  do  not  feel 
sufficiently  empowered  and  able  to  make  a  definite  decision  on 
this  essential  point,  this  question  shall  be  transferred  for  con- 
sideration and  decision  to  the  workers  of  the  Europeon  countries. 

Comrade  Williams  read  the  following  declaration  to  the 
first  clause  moved  by  Comrade  Zinovieff: 

"The  present  private  conference  of  the  revolutionary  lead- 
ers of  the  militant  trade  union  movement  of  Great  Britain, 
Russia  and  Italy,  recognizing  that  the  existing  Trade  Union 
International  is  incapable  of  directing  and  controlling  the  class 
struggle  and  crushing  the  international  bourgeoisie  through 
the  dicatorship  of  the  proletariat,  resolves  to  convene  a  more 
complete  and  representative  conference  of  revolutionary  trade 
unionists  for  the  establishment  of  a  true  Trade  Union  Interna- 
tional, free  from  any  connection  whatever  with  the  capitalist 
League  of  Nations  and  with  the  so-called  leaders  of  the  labor 
movement  who  have  acted  the  part  of  social-patriots  and  chau- 
vinists during  the  world  war  and  continue  to  maintain  the  same 
policy  up  till  the  present  time." 

The  above  declaration  was  accepted  by  all  the  members  of 
the  conference  instead  of  the  first  clause  proposed  by  Comrade 
Zinovieff. 

51 


Comrade  Tomsky  proposed  in  view  of  the  departure  of  thfe 
English  delegation,  to  charge  two  members  of  the  Italian  dele- 
gation and  two  Russian  delegates  among  those  present  at  the 
conference  to  finally  work  out  the  declaration.  The  proposal 
received  full  approval  and  consent  of  Comrades  Williams  and 
Purcell  and  was  accepted. 

It  was  agreed  that  the  Revision  Committee  meet  on  the 
following  day.  This  Committee  has  to  work  out  the  final  form 
of  the  declaration  and  to  confirm  the  minutes  of  the  conference. 

The  same  committee  was  charged  with  the  drawing  up  of 
the  proclamation  addressed  to  the  trade  unions  of  all  countries 
in  accordance  with  the  resolution  proposed  by  Comrade  Zinovieff. 


RZ 


APPENDIX  II. 

DECLARATION  OF  PRINCIPLES 

(This  is  the  same  declaration  quoted  in  full  on  pages  23-24.) 
Moscow;  ^uly  15,  1920. 

APPENDIX  III. 

PROVISIONAL  RULES. 

The  body  formed  by  representatives  of  trade  unions  of 
various  countries  shall  be  known  as:  The  International  Council 
of  Trade  and  Industrial  Unions. 

II.  Aims  and  Objects  of  the  International  Council  of  Trade  and 
Industrial  Unions: 

(1)  To  carry  on  an  insistent  and  continues  propaganda 
for  the  ideas  of  the  revolutionary  class  struggle,  social  revolu- 
tion, dictatorship  of  the  proletariat  and  mass  revolutionary 
action  with  the  object  of  destroying  the  capitalist  system  and 
the  bourgeois  State. 

(2)  To  fight  the  disease  of  class  co-operation  which  is 
weakening  the  labor  movement,  and  against  the  hope  that  a 
peaceful  transition  from  capitalism  is  possible. 

(3)  To  unite  all  the  revolutionary  elements  in  the  world 
trade  union  movement  and  to  conduct  a  determined  struggle 
against  the  International  Labor  Bureau  of  the  League  of  Na- 
tions and  against  the  programme  and  tactics  of  the  Interna- 
tional Labor  Bureau  of  the  League  of  Nations  and  against  the 

53 


programme    and    tactics    of    the    International    Federation    of 
Trade  Unions  in  Amsterdam. 

(4)  To  take  the  initiative  in  organizing  an  international 
campaign  on  the  outstanding  facts  of  the  class  struggle  and 
organize  the  collection  of  funds  for  the  support  of  strikes  and 
great  social  conflicts,  etc. 

(5)  To  collect  all  material  concerning  the  international 
labor  movement  and  to  keep  all  the  organizations  affiliated 
to  the  International  Council  of  Trade  Unions  informed  as  to 
the  movement  in  other  countries. 

(6)  To  publish  books,  leaflets,  pamphlets  affecting  the 
international  movement. 

HI.    Composition  of  Organization. 

This  is  composed  of  representatives  of  Russia,  Italy,  Spain, 
Jugo-Slavia,  Bulgaria,  France,  Georgia,  one  representative  for 
each  country  and  one  delegate  for  each  general  national  centre 
which  belongs  to  the  International  Council  of  Trade  Unions. 
The  Council  also  includes  a  representative  of  the  Executive 
Council  of  the  Communist  International.  The  Council  also 
elects  an  executive  bureau  of  three  persons,  including  a  general 
secretary  and  a  delegate  to  the  Executive  Council  of  the  Com- 
munist International. 

IV.     Bulletin. 

The  International  Council  of  Trade  Unions  shall  publish 
its  own  organ  in  four  languages,  entitled:  "The  Bulletin  of  the 
International  Council  of  Trade  Unions." 

V.    Conferences. 

Only  those  trade  unions  or  minorities  of  trade  unions  who 
conduct  a  revolutionary  struggle  in  their  country  and  recognize 
proletarian  dictatorship  are  entitled  to  representation  at  inter- 
national conferences. 

General    national    centres,    trade   unions    separate    u"  ons, 

54 


and  international  federations  may  be  represented  on  the  fol- 
lowing basis:  General  national  centres  of  trade  unions,  sepa- 
rate unions  and  minorities  or  unions  whose  membership  is  less 
than  500,000  have  the  right  to  send  two  delegates.  Organiza- 
tions having  a  membership  greater  than  500,000  may  send  an 
additional  delegate  for  every  500,000  members.  International 
federations  of  trade  unions,  like  textile  workers,  metalists,  etc., 
send  a  delegate  with  a  consultative  vote.  National  federations 
are  allowed  representation  on  the  condition  that  their  general 
trade  union  centre  is  not  taking  part  in  the  conference. 

With  regard  to  those  trade  unions  who  have  not  yet  clearly 
expressed  themselves  on  the  question  of  proletarian  dictator- 
ship (I.  W.  W.)  the  Council  instructs  the  Executive  to  issue  an 
appeal  to  these,  asking  them  to  submit  this  question  to  their 
local  organizations  and  invite  them  to  take  part  in  the  Inter- 
national Conference. 

VI.     Headquarters 

Until  the  meeting  of  the  International  Conference  appoint- 
ed to  take  place  on  January  1,  1921,  the  headquarters  of  the 
International  Council   of  Trade  Unions   shall  be  Moscow. 


APPENDIX  IV. 

To  the  Trade  Unions  of  All  Countries. 
Comrades : 

The  growth  of  the  trade  union  movement  of  all  countries 
caused  as  a  result  of  the  incredible  disaster  imposed  upon  the 
international  proletariat  by  the  war,  raises  the  question  before 
the  workers  of  all  countries  of  establishing  an  international 
general  staff  of  trade  unions.  The  every-day  facts  of  the 
class  struggle  show  that  outside  of  the  international  struggle 
there  is  no  salvation.  Class  stands  against  class  as  never 
before.  AH  the  strength  of  the  international  bourgeoisie,  all 
its  means  and  resources  are  accumulated  in  one  international 
class  organization.  The  bourgeoisie  has  its  general  staff  in 
the  League  of  Nations  and  has  in  its  possession  the  whole  of 
the  colossal  apparatus  of  the  modern  capitalist  State  so  that  at 
the  first  sign  of  danger  it  may  throw  in  the  whole  of  its  strength 
and  resources.  The  degree  of  class  consciousness  and  organ- 
ization which  international  capitalism  has  attained  can  be  seen 
from  the  events  in  Soviet  Russia  and  Hungary.  Soviet  Hun- 
gary was  crushed  by  the  triumph  of  the  exploiters  of  all  coun- 
tries, and  if  Soviet  Russia  has  up  till  now  not  been  crushed,  it 
is  not  the  fault  of  international  capital  but  its  misfortune.  But 
the  bourgeoisie  is  strong  not  merely  because  of  its  class  con- 
sciousness, organization  and  complete  understanding  of  the  un- 
folding international  straggle,  it  is  still  stronger  as  a  result 
of  the  lack  of  class  experience  of  the  masses  and  above  all 
because  it  relies  upon  the  workers'  organizations  in  its  struggle 
a  gainst  the  workers.  This  is  strange  but  true. 

What  indeed  have  the  trade  unions  of  the  large  and  small 
countries  done  during  the  years  of  war?     How  did  they  carry 

5& 


out  the  traditions  of  international  class  solidarity  and  prole- 
tarian fraternity?  The  trade  unions  in  the  large  majority  of 
cases  were  the  main  supporters  of  the  military  policy  of  their 
governments,  they  co-operated  with  the  bourgeois  nationalist 
scum  of  their  countries  and  roused  the  lowest  chauvinist  in- 
stincts among  the  workers.  If  the  war  was  prolonged  for  such 
a  long  period,  if  we  miss  millions  of  our  brothers  from  our 
ranks,  if  Europe  has  been  converted  into  an  enormous  grave- 
yard and  the  masses  driven  to  desperation,  then  a  large  share 
of  the  blame  falls  upon  these  leaders  of  the  labor  movement 
who  betrayed  the  masses  and  instead  of  hurling  forth  the 
battle  cry,  "Proletarians  of  all  countires  unite,"  shouted  "Prole- 
tarians of  all  countries  murder  and  strangle  each  other."    ' 

And  so  the  very  people  who,  during  the  course  of  many 
years  were  the  servants  of  their  governments  and  who  em- 
ployed their  energy  for  the  mutual  extermination  of  the  peo- 
ples, these  peoples  have  commenced  to  reconstruct  the  Trade 
Union  International  which  they  destroyed  by  their  treachery. 
The  experienced  fighters  for  the  interests  of  the  bourgeoisie, 
Messrs.  L'egien,  Oudeguest,  Jouhaux,  Appleton,  Gompers,  and 
others  gathered  in  Berne  and  Amsterdam,  and  after  long  na- 
tionalist quarrels  and  chauvinistic  accusations,  set  up  an  in- 
ternational Federation  of  Trade  Unions.  What  is  the  basis 
of  this  fedaration?  What  is  its  program?  How  does  this 
international  organization  regard  the  epoch  of  acute  social 
conflicts  through  which  we  are  living?  How  does  it  propose 
to  extricate  humanity  out  of  the  cul-de-sac  into  which  it  has 
been  led  by  the  imperialist  bourgeoisie?  We  can  find  the  an- 
swers to  these  questions  in  the  fact  that  the  inspirers  and  lead- 
ers of  this  Federation  of  Trade  Unions  in  Amsterdam  are  at 
the  same  time  the  most  active  participators  in  the  notorious 
Bureau  of  Labor  of  the  piratical  League  of  Nations  which  i.? 
composed  of  representatives  of  organized  employers,  trade 
unions  and  neutral  bourgeois  governments.  As  is  known,  the 
chief  function  of  this  bureau  is  to  continue  and  strengthen  the 
co-operation  of  classes  which  lies  at  the  basis  of  the  militarist 
policy  of  the  imperialist  countries  for  the  further  exploitation 
of  the   workers   by  international  capital. 

57 


From  this  it  is  perfectly  clear  that  the  Amsterdam  Fede- 
ration is  simply  a  screen  to  conceal  the  "yellow"  leaders  of 
the  trade  union  movement,  who  having  definitely  gone  ove>* 
to  the  side  of  the  imperialists,  now  as  during  the  war,  strive 
to  use  the  organized  power  of  the  workers'  unions  in  the  inter- 
est of  capitalist  society.  The  natural  results  of  such  an  un- 
natural union  of  interests  of  two  completely  opposite  classes 
is  the  complete  fruitlessness  and  unability  of  both  the  Am- 
sterdam Federation  and  the  Paris  Labor  Bureau  of  the  League 
of  Nations  to  the  slightest  degree  to  defend  the  interests  of 
the  working  class,  because  these  organizations  defend  the  in- 
terests of  the  bourgeoisie. 

A  striking  example  of  this  fruitlessness,  is  the  relation  of 
the  international  federation  of  Soviet  Hungary  and  Soviet  Rus- 
sia. It  allowed  the  first  to  be  crushed  without  the  slightest 
protest  and  if  new  they  are  making  weak  attempts  by  organ- 
izing a  boycott  to  bring  Horthy,  whose  policy  of  white  terror 
unceremoniously  compromises  the  whole  idea  of  class  co- 
operation— to  his  senses,  then  it  is  done  only  in  order  to  enter 
into  compromises  with  this  very  execution.  The  attitude  of 
the  Amsterdam  Federation  is  exactly  the  same  and  up  till  now 
it  has  not  even  attempted  definitely  and  resolutely  to  express 
itself  against  intervention  in  Russia,  although  it  knows  per- 
fectly well  that  such  indefiniteness  is  especially  important  and 
desirable  for  the  Entente. 

This  conduct  of  the  Amsterdam  Federation  is  the  logical 
outcome  of  its  policy  and  the  composition  of  its  national  sec- 
tions. An  organization  composed  of  social  patriots  and  be- 
trayers of  the  interests  of  the  workers  of  various  countries 
cannot  create  anything  else  but  an  international  union  of  de- 
ceit and  treachery. 

The  trade  union  movement  of  the  world  together  cannot 
satisfy  itself  simply  by  asserting  this  fact  .  The  social  strug- 
gle is  becoming  more  acute.  Civil  war  has  long  ago  broken 
through  national  frontiers.  In  this  bitter  struggle  of  two  hos- 
tile worlds,  of  two  systems,  the  revolutionary  class  unions  take 
their  place,  and  can  do  nothing  else  but  take  their  place,  side 
by  side  with  the  Communist  parties  of  the  various  countries, 

58 


It  is  self  evident  that  the  Amsterdam  Federation  of  the  unions 
playing  this  subordinate  role  to  the  League  of  Nations  cannot 
serve  as  the  guiding  centre  of  the  revolutionary  class  trade 
union  movement.  It  is  necessary  to  act  up  such  a  centre, 
such  a  general  staff  as  a  counter-balance  to  and  in  spite  of  the 
Amsterdam  centre.  This  centre  was  formed  on  the  15th  of 
July  in  Moscow,  by  the  trade  unions  of  Russia,  Italy,  Spain, 
Jugo-Slavia,  Bulgaria,  France,  and  Georgia,  under  the  title 
of  "The  International  Council  of  Trade  and  Industrial  Unions." 
The  new  general  staff  already  uniting  nearly  three  million 
members,  commenced  its  activity  by  appealing,  to  the  unions 
of  all  the  world  to  break  away  from  those  who  are  conducting 
the  criminal  policy  of  compromise  with  the  bourgeoisie,  and 
to  stand  under  the  banner  of  a  ruthless  class  war  for  the  emanci- 
pation of  the  oppressed  humanity. 

The  International  Council  of  Trade  and  Industrial  Unions 
carries  not  peace  but  a  sword  to  the  bourgeoisie  of  all  countries. 
This  defines  the  essence  of  our  activity.  Our  program  is  the 
violent  overthrow  of  the  bourgeoisie,  the  establishment  of  the 
dictatorship  of  the  proletariat,  a  ruthless  class  war  on  an  inter- 
national and  national  scale  and  a  close  unseverable  alliance 
with  the  Communist  International. 

Those  who  think  that  the  working  class  may  solve  the 
social  question  by  means  of  negotiations  and  agreements  with 
the  bourgeoisie,  those  who  think  that  the  bourgeoisie  will 
voluntarily  surrender  the  means  of  production  to  the  proleta- 
riat and  that  it  is  only  necessary  to  secure  a  parliamentary 
majority,  those  who  suppose  that  in  the  period  of  the  break- 
up of  all  the  relations  and  the  fate  of  the  world  is  being 
decided,  that  the  unions  can  remain  "neutral,"  those  who  in  a 
period  of  civil  war  through  which  we  are  living,  preach  civil 
peace,  let  them  know  that  we  regard  them  as  our  class  enemies, 
and  that  we  will  conduct  ruthless  war  against  them  and 
against  the  organization  which  they  have  set  up. 

The  International  Council  of  Trade  and  Indusrtial  Unions 
and  the  Amsterdam  Federation  are  on  the  opposite  sides  of  the 
barricades.     On  the  one  side  of  the  barricade  there  is  social 

59 


revolution,   on  the   other — social   reaction.     A   proletarian,   an 
honest  revolutionary  can  make  the  choice  without  difficulty. 

Long  live  the  proletarian  revolution! 

Long  live  the  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat! 

Long  live  the  International  Council  of  Trade  and  Industrial 
Unions ! 

Long  live  the  Third  International- 
Moscow,  August  1st,  1920. 

The  International   Council  of 
Trade  and  Industrial  Unions, 


60 


APPENDIX    V. 

MOSCOW  OR  AMSTERDAM. 

By  A.   Lsovsky. 

(1)  At  the  present  moment  there  are  two  international 
trade  union  centres;  one  in  Amsterdam,,  bound  to  the  Second 
International  with  its  theory  and  practice,  and  the  other  in 
Moscow,  connected  by  ideas  and  organization  to  the  Third  In- 
ternational. Between  the  two  existing  trade  union  internation- 
als there  is  the  same  chasm  as  there  is  between  the  Second 
and  Third  Internationals. 

(2)  Trade  unions  organization  standing  on  the  revolution- 
ary class  point  of  view  and  particluarly  those  belonging  to 
the  Third  International,  cannot  belong  to  the  Amsterdam  Trade 
Union  International  because  their  presence  in  the  Amsterdam 
International  ties  the  left  unions  with  the  League  of  Nations 
through  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Amsterdam  Federation 
of  Trade  Unions  which  in  its  turn  is  bound  to  the  International 
Labor  Bureau  at  the  head  of  which  stands  the  betrayer  of  the 
working  class — Albert  Thomas. 

(3)  For  those  unions  which  already  belong  to  the  Third 
International  and  who  took  part  in  its  last  congress  the  ques- 
tion of  leaving  the  Amsterdam  Trade  Union  International  is 
no  longer  a  debateable,  but  a  practical  one.  It  is  a  matter  of 
carrying  out  the  resolution  of  the  Second  Congress  of  the  Third 
International,  which  says:  All  unions  belonging  to  the  Third 
International  must  also  belong  to  the  International  Council  of 
Trade  Unions.  Not  a  single  trade  union  can  remain  within 
the  Third  International  if  it  does  not  enter  the  International 
Council  of  Trade  Unions. 

61 


(4)  The  exit  of  trade  union  centres  from  the  Amster- 
dam International  does  not  by  any  means  mean  that  a  split 
must  take  place  in  international  trade  union  organizations,  like 
the  metal  workers,  textile  workers,  typographical  workers,  etc. 
Industrial  unions  of  various  countries  standing  on  the  revolu- 
tionary class  position  must  not  only  remain  within  their  inter- 
national organizations,  must  take  the  initiative  in  calling  inter- 
national congress  on,  and  otherwise  raising  the  question  of  tha 
class  struggle.  They  must  at  every  conference  and  congress 
raise  the  question  of  joining  the  International  Council  of  Trade 
Unions,  of  direct  action,  of  dictatorship  of  the  proletariat  and 
the  centralization  of  the  international  straggle  against  inter- 
national capital.  If  the  revolutionary  union  finds  itself  in  a 
majority  at  the  conference  it  must  remain  inside  the  interna- 
tional organization,  striving  to  influence  the  corresponding 
unions  of  other  countries  in  order  eventually  to  gain  the 
majority. 

(5)  The  exit  of  trade  unions  and  revolutionary  sections 
of  international  organizations  will  take  place  all  the  sooner 
and  the  less  painfully  when  the  questions  of  international  trade 
union  policy  are  brough  before  the  masses.  Every  worker  or- 
ganized in  a  trade  union  should  understand  that  the  ties  be- 
tween his  union  and  the  general  trade  union  centre  of  his 
country  and  the  unions  and  centres  of  other  countries  is  nrc 
a  matter  of  the  formal  affiliation  to  one  or  other  organization, 
but  a  vital  question  of  national  and  international  class  struggle 
upon  which  depends  the  success  of  the  struggle  of  the  inter- 
national proletariat  for  socialism. 

(6)  Thus  the  new  international  organization  of  revolu- 
tionary class  unions  demands  of  every  trade  union  really  stand- 
ing for  the  class  struggle  and  the  dictatorship  to  rouse  the 
interests  of  the  masses  in  the  international  labor  movement 
and  to  associate  the  struggle  against  the  centre  of  resistance 
of  the  world  bourgeoisie, — the  Amsterdam  Trade  Union  Inter- 
national with  the  pressing  questions  of  the  day  affecting  his 
union  and  the  whole  trade  union  movement.  Only  in  this 
manner  will  the  national  limitations,  which  many  even  revolu- 
tionary class  unions  have  not  yet  outgrown,  be  overcome. 

62 


ADDENDUM. 

After  this  pamphlet  had  already  been  set  up  and  printe.i 
a  radio  was  received  from  Moscow,  dated  September  8,  to  the 
effect  that  the  following  organizations  had  affiliated  to  the 
International  Council  of  Trade  Unions: 

1.  British  Shop  Stewards'  and  Workers'  Committees. 

2.  Transport  Workers'  Federation  of  Holland  and  Dutch 
Indies. 

3.  The  German  Syndicalists. 

4.  The  Syndicalists'  Unions  of  Italy. 

The  affiliation  of  the  British  Shop  Stewards  and  German 
Syndicalists  to  the  International  Council  of  Trade  and  Indus- 
trial Unions  is  the  result  of  the  further  conferences  that  took 
place  in  Moscow  after  the  conclusion  of  the  Second  Congress 
of  the  Third  International.  Thus  the  representaitves  of  the 
British  Shop  Stewards  and  the  German  Syndicalists  finally 
accepted  the  point  of  view  which  the  Russian  delegates  urged. 
One  can  only  welcome  this  affiliation,  as  in  this  manner  the 
unity  of  the  left  wing  of  the  Trade  Union  movement  of  the 
whole  world  is  secured.  The  debates  which  took  place  at  the 
preliminary  conferences  were  of  great  importance,  for  it  is 
essential  that  the  workers  should  understand  the  differences 
which  exist  not  only  in  the  trade  union  movement  as  a  whole, 
but  even  in  the  left  wing.  The  existence  of  an  International 
revolutionary  organization  of  trade  unions  is  only  possible  on 
the  basis  of  a  clear  and  definite  program.  Such  a  program 
can  only  be  drawn  up  when  the  existing  differences  and  mis- 
understandings are  removed  and  a  unanimous  understanding 
of  problems  is  reached  between  all  the  sections  of  the  revolu- 

63 


tionary  trade  and  industrial  organizations.  Unanimity  among 
the  representatives  of  revolutionary  trade  union  organizations 
has  already  been  reached,  we  must  now  see  to  it  that  the 
tens  of  millions  of  organized  workers  in  all  the  world  accept 
the  same  point  of  view.  The  victory  of  the  social  revolution 
will  then  be  assured. 

Christiana,  September  9th,  1920. 

A.  LOSOVSKY. 


64 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

305  De  Neve  Drive  -  Parking  Lot  17  •  Box  951388 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA  90095-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library  from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


Form 


THE  LIimARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  AN6H3UBS 


J    llbb  00238  27 


HD 

Dridzo  - 

6U75 

A2Riid 

The  Internat- 
ional Council 

of  Trade  and 

Industrial 

1 

1 

Unions 

.  _1 

HD 

6hlS 

A2Rlid 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FAi 


AA    001097  215    6 


